About individual releases of CBS-owned shows... (1 Viewer)

[bmasters9]

Something I'm wondering lately about the individual releases of CBS-owned shows like Hawaii Five-O, The Streets of San Francisco, et al.: why is it that when those shows have been reissued lately in new copies of the individual releases, the discs that are in those new copies are the silver ones from the condensed all-in-ones, instead of the ones with the original labels?

To illustrate, here's a shot of Discs 1 and 2 from a new copy of Season 1, Vol. 2 of Streets.

 

[Alf S]

Do the discs play like normal and look ok?

For me at least, that's all I'd be worried about vs. how the disc labels look.

 

[bmasters9]

Do the discs play like normal and look ok?

For me at least, that's all I'd be worried about vs. how the disc labels look.

They do indeed!

And as such, I guess you're right-- it was a silly question on my part, but then again, I'm autistic, and as such, I pay attention to things like that.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

why is it that when those shows have been reissued lately in new copies of the individual releases, the discs that are in those new copies are the silver ones from the condensed all-in-ones, instead of the ones with the original labels?

The new grey/silver labels are cheaper to produce than the full color labels of the original releases. It's solely a cost-saving move.

 

[bmasters9]

The new grey/silver labels are cheaper to produce than the full color labels of the original releases. It's solely a cost-saving move.

That's just what I was wondering! Another reason I asked is because I saw that on Mork & Mindy, Have Gun, et al.

 

[smithbrad]

Something I'm wondering lately about the individual releases of CBS-owned shows like Hawaii Five-O, The Streets of San Francisco, et al.: why is it that when those shows have been reissued lately in new copies of the individual releases, the discs that are in those new copies are the silver ones from the condensed all-in-ones, instead of the ones with the original labels?

To illustrate, here's a shot of Discs 1 and 2 from a new copy of Season 1, Vol. 2 of Streets.

View attachment 39546

I don't think it has anything to do with original individual vs. condensed vs. reissued individual, but instead just the timing of when they were produced and CBS's desire for consistency. For example, my "Streets of San Francisco" has show specific labels for season 1 and volume 1 of season 2, but standard gray for the remaining. My "Gunsmoke" has shiny labels for season 1 but the standard gray for the remaining. My "Perry Mason" and "Bonanza" are standard gray throughout. My guess is that at some point CBS just decided to keep it simple and use the basic gray label for all series labels going forward. Anything produced before that time has a non-standard or show specific label.

To take it a step further, there is really no reason for the condensed packaging to have labels denoting volumes when it is all in one set. That is why I believe the condensed sets were just repackaging of what was produced before for the individual releases. And now what you are finding is the same once again for the reissued sets. They are all just rehashings of the same labels used ever since they made that switch to the basic gray.

 

[Tony Bensley]

The discs on he newer Andy Griffith Show DVD releases also have the same type of silver/gray disc labeling. The Honeymooners and TAGS Season 1 Blu-ray sets use the same type of labeling, except they are blue.

I totally relate on the Autistic front. While I do prefer the previous disc design used on the TAGS DVD sets (Until recently, I had the old Season 4 set, and still have the old Season 7 discs!), I also appreciate the more compact packaging used on the newer reissued sets. At least CBS/Paramount didn't try to squeeze in more episodes per disc on these sets, as this tends to create issues that don't disappear once the disc tray has closed.

CHEERS!

 

[bmasters9]

I should say that I purchased this copy of Streets #1-2 from a promotional/sale shelf in the DVD rack of the Wal-Mart in Simpsonville; it was labeled, along with other CBS individual releases, as "Criminally Good TV." I don't have a picture to prove it, but that's where I got it from.

 

[John*Wells]

I thought maybe it was an Andy Griffith thing. I purchased Gomer Pyle USMC and Matlock and noticed these Gray Discs. Just this week, I purchased Return to Mayberry and noticed this also. Whereas with Star Trek the labeling was not Gray. (referring to the Original releases which was in the $100 per season range. Im guessing Star Trek was owned by Paramount thus the difference?

 

[bmasters9]

Im guessing Star Trek was owned by Paramount thus the difference?

That is true! However, the original clamshell tricorder-shaped releases were released when Paramount was releasing on their own, IIRC; when CBS merged with Paramount, I think that's when the change occurred.

 

[John*Wells]

That is true! However, the original clamshell tricorder-shaped releases were released when Paramount was releasing on their own, IIRC; when CBS merged with Paramount, I think that's when the change occurred.

Until now, it never occurred to me that TOS Was released in what was supposed to be the shape or design of a Tricorder. It also never occurred to me that CBS Merged with Paramount .. I thought the DVD Releases had been licensed to CBS in the same way Shout Released Mister Ed or Anchor Bay released Silk Stalkings Season 1-5

 

[bmasters9]

Until now, it never occurred to me that TOS Was released in what was supposed to be the shape or design of a Tricorder. It also never occurred to me that CBS Merged with Paramount .. I thought the DVD Releases had been licensed to CBS in the same way Shout Released Mister Ed or Anchor Bay released Silk Stalkings Season 1-5

Maybe I'm wrong about the merger; I noticed that you liked my post above, but perhaps I might be mistaken. Here's the Wiki article on CBS Home Entertainment; I'd like for you to look at it and see if I'm incorrect on what I said earlier.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBS_Home_Entertainment

 

[Josh Steinberg]

It's not that CBS and Paramount merged, rather, that they split in two. Sumner Redstone's company Viacom used to have ownership of both, along with a bunch of other businesses, and a few years ago, they split the TV network and the movie studio into different companies. Paramount still releases CBS shows on DVD/BD, but they are no longer corporate siblings. Frankly, I think it was a bad business movie to split them up, and I think the corporate world is starting to come around to that viewpoint as well.

 

[bmasters9]

It's not that CBS and Paramount merged, rather, that they split in two. Sumner Redstone's company Viacom used to have ownership of both, along with a bunch of other businesses, and a few years ago, they split the TV network and the movie studio into different companies. Paramount still releases CBS shows on DVD/BD, but they are no longer corporate siblings. Frankly, I think it was a bad business movie to split them up, and I think the corporate world is starting to come around to that viewpoint as well.

That's just what I wanted to know! I had made a post that John*Wells liked, but on his subsequent response, I thought that perhaps I was wrong.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Unless my memory totally exploded overnight, I'm pretty sure we're right

 

[jcroy]

And as such, I guess you're right-- it was a silly question on my part, but then again, I'm autistic, and as such, I pay attention to things like that.

(On a more general aside).

I too notice a lot of details, even when I know intellectually that such details are not really important. Though I have never been diagnosed by a real doctor/psychiatrist as having a condition on the autism spectrum. (I avoid self-diagnosing myself, since I try not to mislead myself into thinking something that I might not be). In the past, some offline friends/acquintences have accused me of behaving in a manner similar to the Sheldon Cooper character on the Big Bang Theory sitcom. (I don't know if Sheldon Cooper is a high-functioning autistic or aspergers).

In regard to cds/dvds/blurays, most of my attention to details is placed on playability issues. For example, such as checking discs on the computer to search for manufacturing defects/shoddiness, or figuring out how the cryptic machine code functions in the *.ifo files on dvd discs.

Other details like packaging, disc labeling, etc ... are not really a priority for me, unless it drastically affects playback (such as packaging that warps discs, dvd18 + dvd14 flippers, etc ....).

This is just me ^ in regard to paying attention to minute details of dvd disc playback. (ie. On the other hand, I'm aware of others on here who don't share this same mindset in regard to paying attention to technical details of dvd playback).

 

[jcroy]

It's not that CBS and Paramount merged, rather, that they split in two. Sumner Redstone's company Viacom used to have ownership of both, along with a bunch of other businesses, and a few years ago, they split the TV network and the movie studio into different companies. Paramount still releases CBS shows on DVD/BD, but they are no longer corporate siblings. Frankly, I think it was a bad business movie to split them up, and I think the corporate world is starting to come around to that viewpoint as well.

Wonder who will buy up the remains of Paramount, if CBS has no interest in Paramount.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/12/the-redstone-family-has-called-off-the-cbs-viacom-merger

 

[Josh Steinberg]

If you would have asked me a year ago, I might've guessed a Chinese company - Paramount now has deals with Chinese financing partner so it wouldn't strike me as crazy if they just bought the whole hog. But Paramount apparently had major problems getting their Chinese partner to honor the deal and pay the amounts that they had contractually agreed to, so I'm guessing that's not likely to happen.

It's certainly a mess over there.

The thing is, if I was an investor, I wouldn't want to buy a movie studio right now. As a movie enthusiast, absolutely I'd love to own one or work for one. But if I was viewing it solely as a dollars-and-cents initiative, now doesn't seem like a great time. If there was a production company with a great franchise available, I'd snap them up -- like Disney did with Marvel. Paramount honestly should have bought Marvel instead of letting them to Disney. Disney spent about $4 billion to buy Marvel, and a few million more to get out of the distribution deal that Marvel had with Paramount. They announced the deal mid-2009, and it was approved at the very end of 2009. From 2010 onwards, Marvel Studios films (not counting Spider-Man Homecoming, which Sony gets to keep) have grossed over $10 billion. Even taking into account that the studio doesn't get all of that, if Paramount had invested $4 billion a few years ago, they'd have either made it all back or be on the verge of doing so, with an seemingly endless pipeline of future projects still to come.

 

[bmasters9]

(On a more general aside).

I too notice a lot of details, even when I know intellectually that such details are not really important. Though I have never been diagnosed by a real doctor/psychiatrist as having a condition on the autism spectrum. (I avoid self-diagnosing myself, since I try not to mislead myself into thinking something that I might not be). In the past, some offline friends/acquintences have accused me of behaving in a manner similar to the Sheldon Cooper character on the Big Bang Theory sitcom. (I don't know if Sheldon Cooper is a high-functioning autistic or aspergers).

In regard to cds/dvds/blurays, most of my attention to details is placed on playability issues. For example, such as checking discs on the computer to search for manufacturing defects/shoddiness, or figuring out how the cryptic machine code functions in the *.ifo files on dvd discs.

Other details like packaging, disc labeling, etc ... are not really a priority for me, unless it drastically affects playback (such as packaging that warps discs, dvd18 + dvd14 flippers, etc ....).

This is just me ^ in regard to paying attention to minute details of dvd disc playback. (ie. On the other hand, I'm aware of others on here who don't share this same mindset in regard to paying attention to technical details of dvd playback).

Don't know how to explain it, but I think you've made some good points there!

 

[jcroy]

The thing is, if I was an investor, I wouldn't want to buy a movie studio right now. As a movie enthusiast, absolutely I'd love to own one or work for one. But if I was viewing it solely as a dollars-and-cents initiative, now doesn't seem like a great time. If there was a production company with a great franchise available, I'd snap them up -- like Disney did with Marvel. Paramount honestly should have bought Marvel instead of letting them to Disney. Disney spent about $4 billion to buy Marvel, and a few million more to get out of the distribution deal that Marvel had with Paramount. They announced the deal mid-2009, and it was approved at the very end of 2009. From 2010 onwards, Marvel Studios films (not counting Spider-Man Homecoming, which Sony gets to keep) have grossed over $10 billion. Even taking into account that the studio doesn't get all of that, if Paramount had invested $4 billion a few years ago, they'd have either made it all back or be on the verge of doing so, with an seemingly endless pipeline of future projects still to come.

(This may be monday morning quarterbacking).

One big question is whether Paramount had enough cash to buy up Marvel in those days.