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.

Photo
- - - - -

Warner Archive Launches Streaming Service


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

#1 of 160 OFFLINE   Bob Cashill

Bob Cashill

    Screenwriter



  • 2,209 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 15 2001

Posted February 01 2013 - 09:41 AM

In beta and on Roku at the moment. What do we think? (Moderator please post in the Archive Announcement thread if more appropriate.) http://criterioncast...eaming-service/

#2 of 160 OFFLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    captveg



  • 7,281 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted February 01 2013 - 09:44 AM

Dozens and dozens of the archive films are titles I want to see but I do not want to blind buy. If they do a PS3 version I'm in.


"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


#3 of 160 OFFLINE   MLamarre

MLamarre

    Second Unit



  • 418 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 24 2008
  • Real Name:Matthew Lamarre

Posted February 01 2013 - 12:30 PM

I really like the idea and I'm looking forward to trying it, but there are so few WAC titles listed on the website...the majority are films released by WHV on pressed disc years ago. I can't help but think that they probably feel if they stream too many WAC films it will hurt their disc sales... Also interesting to note that they're streaming RUN OF THE ARROW and UNTIL THE END OF THE WORLD, two films that haven't been released on disc at all by either WHV or WAC.

#4 of 160 OFFLINE   studioexexs

studioexexs

    Auditioning



  • 4 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 31 2013

Posted February 01 2013 - 01:15 PM

STREAMING SUCKS - THE CONSUMER not a cloud company should be in control - and with streaming the consumer is never in control

#5 of 160 OFFLINE   JoHud

JoHud

    Screenwriter



  • 2,707 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2007
  • Real Name:Joe Hudak

Posted February 01 2013 - 01:20 PM

I agree that it is currently nothing I'm going to go out of my way for presently since most of these are older home video transfers and hardly any of them cover current WAC titles. It's still Beta though so it's still possible the selection will improve. However, I agree with Mr. Lammarre that this service will likely be designed not to cut into the profits of their MOD product very much.

Also interesting to note that they're streaming RUN OF THE ARROW and UNTIL THE END OF THE WORLD, two films that haven't been released on disc at all by either WHV or WAC.

I'm sure those, along with Blonde Crazy, are the same transfers that air on TCM presently as the WAC intents to remaster them in the future for home video. A recent Facebook response from one of their representatives stated that the existing video transfer for Blonde Crazy is over 25 years old. Run of the Arrow is also in serious need of remastering and I wouldn't doubt the current transfer is non-anamorphic.

#6 of 160 OFFLINE   David Weicker

David Weicker

    Screenwriter



  • 1,654 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 26 2005
  • Real Name:David

Posted February 01 2013 - 01:38 PM

There are a few of their rarer titles - TV pilots or series - that I wouldn't mind streaming. Or some of the titles that aren't likely to show up on a cable channel. But I'm with Brandon, there are titles I kind of remember (from my youth), that I would prefer to see again before purchasing. As for cutting into their profits, if they did a 'rent to own' model, where you get a discount on a previously streamed title, that might encourage some additional sales. David

#7 of 160 OFFLINE   Michael Elliott

Michael Elliott

    Lead Actor



  • 7,132 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 11 2003
  • Real Name:Michael Elliott
  • LocationKY

Posted February 01 2013 - 01:47 PM

This is the greatest thing and something I predicted in one of the other threads about these titles. I will continue to buy the multi-set shorts but now with the streaming it will give me a reason to not wait until they turn up on TCM. Great job and it's something I will certainly support. Some Warner Archive titles are already up on Amazon. I just updated my Roku to the top-end model last week so this is perfect timing.

#8 of 160 OFFLINE   mdnitoil

mdnitoil

    Supporting Actor



  • 779 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 20 2006
  • Real Name:Scott

Posted February 01 2013 - 02:58 PM

It'll be fascinating to see how this plays out. If ever there was a group hostile towards streaming, it's the middle-aged and up classic movie collectors. I'm not sure how much interest I have at the moment. Like many here, I prefer a little more control over my viewing options.

#9 of 160 OFFLINE   DeWilson

DeWilson

    Screenwriter



  • 1,999 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 05 2006

Posted February 01 2013 - 06:05 PM

A rose by any other name... it's just TCM on Demand for Roku! :D

#10 of 160 ONLINE   Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Moderator



  • 24,872 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted February 01 2013 - 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by Michael Elliott 

This is the greatest thing and something I predicted in one of the other threads about these titles. I will continue to buy the multi-set shorts but now with the streaming it will give me a reason to not wait until they turn up on TCM. Great job and it's something I will certainly support.

Some Warner Archive titles are already up on Amazon.

I just updated my Roku to the top-end model last week so this is perfect timing.

They're on iTunes too.


Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Schedule

 


#11 of 160 OFFLINE   Michael Elliott

Michael Elliott

    Lead Actor



  • 7,132 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 11 2003
  • Real Name:Michael Elliott
  • LocationKY

Posted February 01 2013 - 07:50 PM

It'll be fascinating to see how this plays out. If ever there was a group hostile towards streaming, it's the middle-aged and up classic movie collectors. I'm not sure how much interest I have at the moment. Like many here, I prefer a little more control over my viewing options.

This is certainly true to a point but I've seen quite a few classic movies on the big screen over the past few years and it's about 50/50 on the young and old. I really do think TCM and DVD helped get some classic films into the hands of younger people. Fans of Tarantino have gone back and gotten involved with the films that he recommends and I think people like Scorsese has a strong following among young people and they will check out movies he talks about. What's hard is getting young people to drop $15-$20 on a DVD-R from a website they might not know about. I really do think streaming is yet another way to introduce these films to younger people. Like it or not, streaming is what younger people are doing. Be it on a Roku or their phone. I signed up and I hope to get an invite to try this out. If not, I'd gladly pay $15-$20 a month to stream some titles as long as they aren't just things that were given an official release on DVD. I would prefer a pay-per-view type thing with them just charging $2 or $3 a title. Either way, I'm certainly very happy that they've taken this step and hopefully the other studios would follow. I mentioned in the Columbia/Karloff thread that there are so many VERY SMALL titles that big stars did that just wouldn't really be big enough sellers for even a made on demand release. This would be a great way to put them out there for people to see. Incomplete films, outtakes, shorts and so on.

#12 of 160 OFFLINE   Camps

Camps

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 189 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 17 2010

Posted February 02 2013 - 12:19 AM

Thanks for the heads-up, Bob.

#13 of 160 OFFLINE   Louis Letizia

Louis Letizia

    Supporting Actor



  • 820 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 10 2000

Posted February 02 2013 - 12:36 AM

Interested in seeing how UNTIL THE END OF THE WORLD looks in HD. a bLURAY SOON?

#14 of 160 OFFLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    captveg



  • 7,281 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted February 02 2013 - 04:56 AM

Originally Posted by studioexexs 

STREAMING SUCKS - THE CONSUMER not a cloud company should be in control - and with streaming the consumer is never in control


I partially agree. Streaming as a replacement of owning personal copies sucks. However, streaming as an option in the rental market is excellent. Between Netflix and Amazon I've been able to see plenty of films that have quality DVD or Blu-ray releases without hassle, and discovered ones I enjoyed enough to then purchase.


"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


#15 of 160 OFFLINE   Camps

Camps

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 189 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 17 2010

Posted February 02 2013 - 06:05 AM

Here's a pretty informative article: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/60707

#16 of 160 OFFLINE   Michael Elliott

Michael Elliott

    Lead Actor



  • 7,132 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 11 2003
  • Real Name:Michael Elliott
  • LocationKY

Posted February 02 2013 - 06:25 AM

People who say it sucks: You do realize that you have an option to buy that stream and if you do then a cloud or the boogeyman aren't going to take it from you? It's not like they're burning every copy of GONE WITH THE WIND and if you want to see it you must wait for them to stream it once a year. It's an alternative. I'm not going to jump on the doom and gloom fight but I think everyone should go out and buy a Roku. :) A lot of companies (including Something Weird, Sinister Cinema) are still selling DVD-Rs at $11-$15 while offering a cheaper stream for around $10. Sinister Cinema (through Amazon) even allows you to rent a movie (through streaming) at $2 or just buy it at $7. This is something that's really good because they deal with movies that most people aren't going to watch but it works because you can "try" a movie for $2 and if you then like it and want to own it you can have it for $7. Still under $10, which is a lot cheaper than taking a blind buy on a DVD-R. I'm not sure if this new site is just going to allow streaming or if down the road they will just make every movie available to buy as well. $15 DVD-R. $10 Stream $3 Rental I think everyone is taken care of and it seems like it would have more money going into Warner's pocket. .

#17 of 160 OFFLINE   JoHud

JoHud

    Screenwriter



  • 2,707 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2007
  • Real Name:Joe Hudak

Posted February 02 2013 - 07:06 AM

So far, it seems clear that latter day WAC titles that were remastered in 2k will not be presented in HD (Mexican Spitfire, Texas Lawmen, etc). However, with many films released by WHV that have not made it to blu-ray are presented in HD and for that along, a rental plan will probably be worth it. By far the biggest treat is the inclusion of Wim Wender's Until The End Of The World in HD, a film that never even made it to DVD in North America. Close behind it is the long OOP The Loved Ones being presented in HD.

#18 of 160 OFFLINE   Bob Cashill

Bob Cashill

    Screenwriter



  • 2,209 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 15 2001

Posted February 02 2013 - 10:46 AM

I wonder if this HD streaming will affect the Archve's Blu-ray plans...still waiting for additional titles in the format.

#19 of 160 OFFLINE   Roger Rollins

Roger Rollins

    Supporting Actor



  • 931 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 19 2001

Posted February 02 2013 - 10:25 PM

I

So far, it seems clear that latter day WAC titles that were remastered in 2k will not be presented in HD (Mexican Spitfire, Texas Lawmen, etc). However, with many films released by WHV that have not made it to blu-ray are presented in HD and for that along, a rental plan will probably be worth it.

In actuality, the circumstances are not exactly as you perceive. One of WB archives' earliest 'remastered' titles ( from the era of the red banded header on the packagng) was the Mnogram noir "Violence" ( Great little gem BTW) and that title is in their private beta in HD. Mexican Spitfire and the monogram set with "Texas Lawmen" were not marketed as remastered releases, and likely used newer SD sources. I would venture to guess that there will be many more of the WAC- initiated HD remasters as time goes on included in thie new service as it officialy launches. Eiher way, with such a stellar array of great films and unique rarities ( especially the cool and ultra-rare TV stuff they have which you can't see anywhere else), this service is a must for me, especially if is reasonably priced!

#20 of 160 OFFLINE   Joe Karlosi

Joe Karlosi

    Producer



  • 6,001 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 05 2003

Posted February 03 2013 - 12:55 AM

I partially agree. Streaming as a replacement of owning personal copies sucks. However, streaming as an option in the rental market is excellent. Between Netflix and Amazon I've been able to see plenty of films that have quality DVD or Blu-ray releases without hassle, and discovered ones I enjoyed enough to then purchase.

I agree with this. I am basically AGAINST streaming as far as OWNING is concerned. If there's a movie I like that I want to add to my own personal library, then I wish to have it physically on a commercially released disc -- and with packaging and artwork to compliment it (even if it's a MOD release, though of course I prefer PRESSED discs). Those who support streaming better start realizing that there is every likelihood that one day their viewing choices will be dictated by the studios, and they will decide what is available on their menu for you to watch, only for whatever length of time they decide it will be available to you. Streaming completely gives them the reigns with which to control you and your viewing options. But once you own a physical disc, it's yours to do with as you please forever -- as long as you are able to have the electronics to play them on (store a couple of extra players and HDTVs if you like). Having said that, RENTALS are another matter entirely. I am presently not hooked up for streaming because there are not many times I think of films I would like to sample before deciding whether or not they're worth owning. If I wanted to watch more first-time films, then I think streaming is preferable to going to a rental store like BLOCKBUSTER and having to borrow a disc and then go back and return it. For example, although I generally dislike modern remakes of older films, I am interested in seeing the redux of THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT (I thought Wes Craven's original was a terrible movie). If I had streaming, then I could just press the button and have it delivered straight to my screen. That would be fine --- but if I decided I wanted to OWN the film, then I want a physical DVD or Blu-ray; not some cloud or link or file, or whatever the heck it is.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users