trajan
Screenwriter
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2009
- Messages
- 1,198
- Real Name
- lar
This is beginning to look just like last year. Big promises from Warner "we will be pleased with all kinds of releases for all tastes"And- Paramount releases where??? I give up.
Yea ---I know.Didier R said:You're unbelievable, Trajan. I'll leave it at that.
Go ahead and defend them, but let time prove me wrong.lukejosephchung said:Trajan, according to the calendar, we're still FOUR DAYS from ending 2014's FIRST QUARTER...not even 3 MONTHS into the year, and already you're bellyaching about this!!!
This is the year almost over[not quite] 2014 edtion thread.TravisR said:^ You may well be right but can't you use one of the other multiple threads that you've started on the same basic topic?
You don't make any sense. But we're used to it.trajan said:This is the year almost over[not quite] 2014 edtion thread.
Because, Warner ownes 90 % of the movies I would like. Its just a personal thing.Brandon Conway said:Every year the first quarter is always the slowest, every year this conversation happens...
For the record, Jan-Mar '14 WB distributed new-to-Blu catalog releases:
The Americanization of Emily (1964)
Boiler Room (2000)
City of Angels (1998)
Death Wish (1974) (Paramount)
El Dorado (1966) (Paramount)
Gunfight at the O.K. Corral (1957) (Paramount)
Hairspray (1988)
Hatari! (1962) (Paramount)
The Killing Fields (1984)
Performance (1970)
The Postman Always Rings Twice (1981)
Stop-Loss (2008) (Paramount)
Tequila Sunrise (1988)
Two Weeks Notice (2002)
And what did we get from Disney and Lionsgate combined in that time?
The Jungle Book (1967)
The Jungle Book 2 (2003) (Yes, this was a theatrical release)
Buffalo '66 (1998)
The Wicker Man (1973)
Where are the every-other-day threads yelling at them?
A fair point, but how much are the rival studio companies delivering of that same era? Fox is obviously the exception and clear blu-ray champ of 2014, but who else is even bothering with those era outside of a few token standouts (i.e Universal)? The 50s+ has always been the preferable back catalog on blu-ray. Even Twilight Time very rarely releases 40s or 30s titles.David Weicker said:And from the list above, only one from the 50s. Where are the 30s, 40s, 50s titles? The 'studio system' essentially ended in the mid60s/early 70s.
They really are piling up. There must be 10 threads made in the past 2 months relating to WB that are basically: "Why haven't they updated every DVD they ever released on blu-ray by now?" as if the classic home video market is really strong enough these days to even make 50% a reality in the near future.Brandon Conway said:Where are the every-other-day threads yelling at them?
Was that last addition necessary?Didier R said:You don't make any sense. But we're used to it.
Warner has BY FAR the largest classic library, and not only that, they have probably 75-80 percent of all the best movies from the pre-1960 era. I agree with the OP and their lack of activity in that regard is alarming. Blu-ray is not getting any more viable for classics, and the Warner Archive for Blu-ray is practically a non-starter (don't think they've released a single movie from the Hollywoods Golden Age.)JoHud said:While WB has the largest classic library, do they also have the largest budget to release them all on blu-ray? They're doing as well or better then their contemporaries.