A Plea From Thomas T (1 Viewer)

[Will Krupp]

The timing of Tom's thread may or may not be a reaction to my post in the TT thread yesterday

I guarantee you it wasn't.

 

[Robin9]

Are you referring to anyone in particular here?

Certainly not to you! I may disagree with you sometimes, and I did disagree with your post about Twilight Time, but I have never found you to be unpleasant.

 

[Thomas T]

When I look at my movie collection I'm always struck by how it could never be owned in total by anyone who "wasn't" me. It's soooo eclectic and yet specific and I, for one, am thrilled that we have the chance to sometimes get those "what were they thinking?" releases that we never thought we'd see.

It couldn't possibly be more eclectic than mine, Will. My taste is all over the place. To paraphrase Auntie Mame, "Cinema is a banquet and most poor suckers are starving to death." In my collection, you'll find Citizen Kane (1941) and Xanadu (1980), L'Avventura (1960) and The Green Slime (1968), Laurence Olivier's Shakespeare films and Connie Francis musicals, Jean Luc Godard films and Elvis movies, Mario Lanza and Mario Bava, Lillian Gish and Mamie Van Doren, the oldest film in my collection is 1912 and the most current is 2018, so many movies so little time.

 

[Thomas T]

I think what's in question is a matter of judgement. If you were the rights holder of The Magnificent Ambersons and The Swarm, which one would you lease out and which one would you publish?

I'd publish the moneymaker and lease out the prestige

 

[ThadK]

Aren't we all getting a little too sensitive? This whole forum is built around picking and nitpicking things apart. FFS, there's a whole thread devoted to custom-made covers because people don't like the official covers. And, some of these incendiary posts are well-reasoned and worded. Not all criticism is equal to pissing on parades.

 

[Vic Pardo]

It couldn't possibly be more eclectic than mine, Will. My taste is all over the place. To paraphrase Auntie Mame, "Cinema is a banquet and most poor suckers are starving to death." In my collection, you'll find Citizen Kane (1941) and Xanadu (1980), L'Avventura (1960) and The Green Slime (1968), Laurence Olivier's Shakespeare films and Connie Francis musicals, Jean Luc Godard films and Elvis movies, Mario Lanza and Mario Bava, Lillian Gish and Mamie Van Doren, the oldest film in my collection is 1912 and the most current is 2018, so many movies so little time.

And there was a very brief window of time when Elvis, Connie Francis, Mario Lanza, Lillian Gish and Mamie Van Doren could all have made a movie together. In some alternate universe, they might have.

 

[Thomas T]

And there was a very brief window of time when Elvis, Connie Francis, Mario Lanza, Lillian Gish and Mamie Van Doren could all have made a movie together. In some alternate universe, they might have.

Funny you should bring that up! Prior to the 1973 Ross Hunter Lost Horizon musical remake, Vincente Minnelli at MGM was planning his own musical take on Lost Horizon in 1959. He'd lined up Mario Lanza as Richard (called Ricardo for obvious reasons), Elvis Presley as George, Mamie Van Doren as Catherine, Connie Francis as the young Maria and Lillian Gish as the post Shangri La Maria. Unfortunately, Lanza's untimely death caused the termination of the project. Ah, what might have been!

 

[Mark-P]

It couldn't possibly be more eclectic than mine, Will. My taste is all over the place. To paraphrase Auntie Mame, "Cinema is a banquet and most poor suckers are starving to death." In my collection, you'll find Citizen Kane (1941) and Xanadu (1980), L'Avventura (1960) and The Green Slime (1968), Laurence Olivier's Shakespeare films and Connie Francis musicals, Jean Luc Godard films and Elvis movies, Mario Lanza and Mario Bava, Lillian Gish and Mamie Van Doren, the oldest film in my collection is 1912 and the most current is 2018, so many movies so little time.

That almost describes my collection to a T! The only things I'm missing are Mario Bava and Mamie Van Doren.

 

[Mike Frezon]

The timing of Tom's thread may or may not be a reaction to my post in the TT thread yesterday, in which it is obvious that my message did not play well with other members here. That's okay...obviously I don't post in order to collect "likes." Sometimes, however, the crux of my argument(s) does not come across as intended, and that can only be due to my writing not being as sharp as it needs to be. The underlying message this time was meant to be that Twilight Time has given us years of amazing Blu-ray releases we'd not have had otherwise, but that I have been noticing what seems to me to be a decline in the number of really exciting releases (i.e. admittedly those titles on my personal wish list) for several months, leading me to wonder if the company is getting toward the bottom of titles available to them that I am anxious to own. I am actually pleased to see the posts after mine that disagreed with me and named one or more of this month's announcements that they were ecstatic to see are coming out.

I disagreed with Mr. Crawford who called what I said "a cheap shot," as I was in no way trying to denigrate Twilight Time, a company I have always admired and supported (in writing and with a sizable chunk of my limited disposable income). I was making an observation that, as it turns out, might be mine alone. I accept that. As you indicate, Mike, "What we like and what others like is never going to match up perfectly." But I am not sure why you also say, "then why be antagonistic with the studios or distributors..." I don't believe I actually did that, as I had no intention to, but if it comes across that way to you, again, my writing is the issue. I will re-read my future messages more than once before posting them from now on.

All the power to TT now and in the future,

Your premise is flawed, Dick, in that my post was in direct response to something you posted in another thread. My post was only made in response to Thomas T's OP in this thread--a general overview of a trend towards members getting negative about release announcements when their favorite films are not included in their number.

What I wrote was in no way directed specifically at you...just the concept that many members get vitriolic whenever releases are announced and don't include something they want.

No harm, no foul.

 

[Dick]

Okay

Your premise is flawed, Dick, in that my post was in direct response to something you posted in another thread. My post was only made in response to Thomas T's OP in this thread--a general overview of a trend towards members getting negative about release announcements when their favorite films are not included in their number.

What I wrote was in no way directed specifically at you...just the concept that many members get vitriolic whenever releases are announced and don't include something they want.

No harm, no foul.

Okay. No offense taken. We all post things that we regret or which don't say what we had set out to say.

Again, Twilight Time rules.

 

[Will Krupp]

Funny you should bring that up! Prior to the 1973 Ross Hunter Lost Horizon musical remake, Vincente Minnelli at MGM was planning his own musical take on Lost Horizon in 1959. He'd lined up Mario Lanza as Richard (called Ricardo for obvious reasons), Elvis Presley as George, Mamie Van Doren as Catherine, Connie Francis as the young Maria and Lillian Gish as the post Shangri La Maria. Unfortunately, Lanza's untimely death caused the termination of the project. Ah, what might have been!

There was an infamous musical Broadway flop based on LOST HORIZON (1956, maybe?) called "Shangri-La." Was the earlier musical going to be based on that??

 

[Thomas T]

There was an infamous musical Broadway flop based on LOST HORIZON (1956, maybe?) called "Shangri-La." Was the earlier musical going to be based on that??

Oh dear I was hoping the absurdity of the casting would make it clear that I was just having a bit of fun. There was no such project by Minnelli at MGM and certainly not with that cast! I have that same problem in real life. I'll make the most outrageous and absurd comment with a straight face (I once told someone that Una O'Connor was a notorious nymphomaniac and Greer Garson once walked into the ladies room at a Hollywood party and found Ronald Colman and Una having sex in one of the stalls) only instead of getting a laugh, I was seriously asked what were my sources. Clearly, comedy is not my forte Alas, a twinkle in the eye can't be seen on the internet.

 

[Alan Tully]

Yes, but I take it that it's okay to be hostile to Paramount for shutting up shop with their catalogue titles...the rotters!

 

[titch]

It couldn't possibly be more eclectic than mine, Will. My taste is all over the place. To paraphrase Auntie Mame, "Cinema is a banquet and most poor suckers are starving to death." In my collection, you'll find Citizen Kane (1941) and Xanadu (1980), L'Avventura (1960) and The Green Slime (1968), Laurence Olivier's Shakespeare films and Connie Francis musicals, Jean Luc Godard films and Elvis movies, Mario Lanza and Mario Bava, Lillian Gish and Mamie Van Doren, the oldest film in my collection is 1912 and the most current is 2018, so many movies so little time.

I swear you resemble Lee Marvin in appearance! I'm sure you have plenty of his films too!

 

[Thomas T]

I swear you resemble Lee Marvin in appearance!

Actually I usually get Alex Trebek of Jeopardy! and sometimes Paul Scofield. When I was younger with black hair and a mustache, I'd get John Oates of Hall and Oates all the time!

 

[ThadK]

Yes, but I take it that it's okay to be hostile to Paramount for shutting up shop with their catalogue titles...the rotters!

Thanks to the fact that they license their library out, we have plenty of Paramount-owned titles across several different labels, ranging from present day flicks to the silent era. Many of these sub-licensers also pay for new transfers and restoration, on top of the license. So it kind of gets irritating to keep hearing the excuse of "too expensive" coming from a label run by the rights holder.

 

[Will Krupp]

Oh dear I was hoping the absurdity of the casting would make it clear that I was just having a bit of fun. There was no such project by Minnelli at MGM and certainly not with that cast! I have that same problem in real life. I'll make the most outrageous and absurd comment with a straight face (I once told someone that Una O'Connor was a notorious nymphomaniac and Greer Garson once walked into the ladies room at a Hollywood party and found Ronald Colman and Una having sex in one of the stalls) only instead of getting a laugh, I was seriously asked what were my sources. Clearly, comedy is not my forte Alas, a twinkle in the eye can't be seen on the internet.

OMG!!! I NEVER even looked at the complete cast list! HAHAHAH
ALL I saw was Minnelli, Lanza (which I admit I thought was odd, considering his history with the studio) and the LOST HORIZON musical and my mind immediately went to the broadway flop so I asked the question without absorbing what else you wrote.

How EMBARRASSING for me!




(You realize I'm probably NOT going to fund that operation now, right?)

 

[Mike Frezon]

(You realize I'm probably NOT going to fund that operation now, right?)

 

[B-ROLL]

OMG!!! I NEVER even looked at the complete cast list! HAHAHAH
...


(You realize I'm probably NOT going to fund that operation now, right?)

So hold the Mayo Clinic then

 

[Alan Tully]

Thanks to the fact that they license their library out, we have plenty of Paramount-owned titles across several different labels, ranging from present day flicks to the silent era. Many of these sub-licensers also pay for new transfers and restoration, on top of the license. So it kind of gets irritating to keep hearing the excuse of "too expensive" coming from a label run by the rights holder.

Not that I've noticed that much. There's the Kino releases of titles that haven't had a DVD release, & one or two titles (like The Naked Prey) have been released, but so much great stuff remains unreleased. Oh well, maybe one day.