Neil Brock
Senior HTF Member
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2009
- Messages
- 4,342
http://classictvhistory.wordpress.com/2012/06/12/a-kettle-of-precious-fish/
I think that speaks volumes. What possible excuse could they give that would be viable? Everyone knows that better versions exist of the first 15 shows, both on film and on 1-inch tape.John DeAngelis said:I found it interesting that Shout Factory refused to be interviewed unless the questions were submitted in advance.
1-inch videotapes hold up amazingly well. And I don't know where you get the idea that those tapes were "constantly used". Nick ran them through a few times and other than that those tapes haven't been used anywhere since. Believe me, 4 or 5 plays of a one-inch tape is nothing. Unless those tapes were stored in a garage or some other such damp place, they would look as good today as the day they were transferred. I recently had some transfers done off 1-inch of a show that was mastered to tape around the same time period and they look pristine.Corey3rd said:The harkening back to the video masters made for Nick At Nite doesn't seem to want to deal with the fact that those tapes were struck in 1984. They're pushing 30 years old. It's videotape which doesn't age well when used constantly over the years.
That is definitely plausible, as is the possibility that some of those involved have no relationship with Sony and couldn't get the time of day from them, or that in Shout!'s case they could work with Sony, but the cost to gain such prints at this time was beyond projected revenue forecasts when only one season had not been previously released. Thus, being too risky of a venture. The fact is we don't know, and most likely never will. I choose to not speculate in a negative way when there are no facts to justify it. This is a "fandom" hobby where everyone wants a perfect release regardless of the cost. But it is also a business that continues to see companies going under. Independents have the most risk since they have the least capital to work from and typically don't get the pick of the most profitable shows. Mistakes will happen and hard choices will have to be made, but I'd rather support them with the idea of more releases continuing in the future, then bad mouthing them without evidence and having another option go under.Neil Brock said:People on these boards attribute those who are in this business with far, far more knowledge and intelligence than is warranted. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that none of these new owners had any clue that Nick at Nite ran the show in the mid-80s and that gorgeous 1-inch transfers existed.
The various owners of ROUTE 66 over the last few year must have been getting payments from If Sony since they only handles the syndication of ROUTE 66 and has no rights beyond that - So they ARE fully aware there tapes on-hand. (and contractually might even have a right to access those tapes.)Neil Brock said:It seems as if the rights have been getting passed around from one incompetent entity to another. I don't think that its out of the question that none of these new owners have had the brains to pick up the phone and contact Sony to even ask about getting access to the remastered tapes. People on these boards attribute those who are in this business with far, far more knowledge and intelligence than is warranted. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that none of these new owners had any clue that Nick at Nite ran the show in the mid-80s and that gorgeous 1-inch transfers existed.
I think you've summarized the situation correctly, Brad. Having the rights to release Route 66 on DVD doesn't mean Shout! was in possession or had access to all the films/tapes of the show.smithb said:Someone please correct me if I am wrong in stating this, but from what i have gathered on this forum, there is ownership/rights to content and ownership of physical media that content may be on, and that the two don't always coincide. So an independent like Shout! may own the Route 66 content but that does not mean they automatically own all the physical media that that content resides on. So whether it be a studio like Sony having physical film and tapes with Route 66 on them in their vaults, or collectors with prints of Route 66 in their personal possession, Shout! does not own or automatically gain access to this media. Which I guess is why there gan be difficulty at times getting certain releases out because of negotiation between multiple sides of the equation.
Until hearing otherwise, and based on what has happened to date, the logical conclusion for me is that Shout! now owns the rights to the content, and in the transaction received prints available from the same source. But that Sony has better film and tape elements of Route 66 in their vaults and has no intention of sharing them without proper financial incentive. And for what Shout! was releasing, it was not deemed advantageous to broker a deal with Sony for better prints based on the cost to do so and the expected revenue to be gained from this release. This just seems so much more logical to me then assuming that everyone associated with releasing or syndicating Route 66 (Roxbury, Shout!, RTV) are so uninformed that they didn't take advantage of readily accessible better prints.
That can simply mean "archived materials" from the source they bought the series from. Unless they bought the series directly from Sony, it does not mean they received what is in Sony's vaults. I seem to recall reading on this forum multiple times before that just because someone has rights to a show it does not mean they own or have rights to access all the physical media that the show may exist on. So if I have it interpreted correctly, Shout! has the right to distribute Route 66 using what ever prints they have on hand or can obtain, while Sony has control over whatever media they own that contains the show, but can't distribute it without licensing from Shout! (unless Sony also has distribution rights). Based on what has happened, that is the logical conclusion to me.DeWilson said:But SHOUT! didn't just get the DVD rights...
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/richard-pryor-route-66-258096
Shout! Factory also announced a new kind of deal for the company: Instead of simply licensing DVD rights to the hit 1960-64 TV show Route 66, it bought proprietary rights to the series, including all 116 original episodes, archived materials, worldwide home entertainment and digital rights and North American broadcast rights.
The point I was making was that just because Shout! bought rights to the show that it didn't mean they automatically assumed control of the physical property regarding that show that is in possession of others. So it sounds like you are validating the premise I made as a true possibility in this case.Neil Brock said:I've negotiated deals where one entity owned the rights while the physical property resided in a studio's vaults and the studio had no problems whatsoever in turning the elements over the the rights holder. Without charging a fee. So to say that Sony won't do it or that they are looking to charge a fortune just does not coincide with my experiences.