An open plea to MGM to STOP releasing FULL FRAME ONLY discs of WIDESCREEN titles. All members help! (1 Viewer)

[Brandon Conway]

Dear MGM,

I only buy films on DVD that are presented in their OAR. For proof of this, see my DVD collection in the link in my signature. Even though a specific cult title I want has yet to be released without OAR from your company, unless policy changes I can see that happening very easily down the road, and I will simply spend my money elsewhere. I remember when UHF was announced and I was able to get it for the first time in its 1.85:1 OAR. I was ecstatic. Fortunately, Weird Al is also an OAR supporter, so we got the OAR version of the film on DVD. I have often wondered what would have happened had he not been such an intrigal part of the making of that DVD. That disc has both the Widescreen and the Pan & Scan versions of the film on it. You do this quite often with your releases. Why can't it be done with all, so that the OAR is always avaialble to the film enthusiast?

Thanks for your time,

Brandon Conway

 

[Tony-B]

MGM, just take a look at all the responses here. Do you realize how much money you are losing because of this decision to release these supposed "niche" titles in a modified aspect ratio only? If you want to appeal to both sides of the argument, then go back to the way things were and include OAR on one side of the disc, and MAR on the flipside. You should know that widescreen discs outsell "full screen" almost 99.99% of the time. So why would you go against that trend? It doesn't make any sense! As I have said earlier, you could include both OAR and MAR on the same disc, like you used to do, and not not lose any potential sales from people that only buy WS or only FS.

Come on MGM! You have nothing to lose and everything to gain! Just make sure to re-release these FS only titles in WS.

 

[Jenna]

Tony B: Well said!

MGM: I will NOT purchase Pan & Scan!
As soon as I read that on the back of any DVD, I drop it back in the bin!

I want OAR or nothing!

 

[Michael Allred]

As further evidence that widescreen outsells full frame titles, let's take a look at the recent top 10 DVD sales chart shall we?

1- "Cradle to the Grave" (widescreen)
2- "House of 1000 Corpses"
3- "The Lizzie McGuire Movie"
4- "The Hunted" (widescreen)
5- "Head of State" (widescreen)
6- "Bringing Down the House" (widescreen)
7- "Daredevil" (widescreen)
8- "Final Destination 2"
9- "Gangs of New York"
10- "Futurama: Season 2"

Half of the top 10 is made up of widescreen only titles, their full frame only counterparts are not there. This is not an oddity, I've been keeping track of the top 10 DVD sales and widescreen outselling full frame is the rule, not the exception.

So the blockbusters in OAR outsell FF, that obvious. Now why do studios release some of their smaller titles FF only? The biggest selling point of movies like "Real Men", "Remo Williams" on DVD is not just for "superior quality", but that people will finally see them in their correct aspect ratios. "Real Men" will never even come close to selling as many copies as "Daredevil", so the best thing to do is make sure you optimize sales the best way you can. Making it a special edition is not likely of course, so what's left to do to make it as appealing to consumers as possible? Present the film in it's OAR. Not doing so equals shooting yourself in the foot. "Real Men" on DVD is really nothing more than VHS on disc. Consumers want a step *up* from VHS, not something just as bad.

As I've said before, if it's not OAR, you might as well not bother releasing it at all.

 

[Jon Martin]

MGM: I will NOT purchase Pan & Scan!

Once again, these are not pan and scan titles being debated (with the excpetion of GATOR and WHITE LIGHTNING which may be)

Pan and scan is quite different than full screen / Open matte etc. You can't use the term when you mean the other.

 

[Malcolm R]

Any alteration to how the film was projected in theaters is unacceptable no matter what terminology is technically correct.

If it's not anamorphic widescreen, it's not coming into my house, period. (unless it's a classic film in the Academy ratio or a special case scenario).

 

[Ricardo C]

If it's not anamorphic widescreen, it's not coming into my house, period. (unless it's a classic film in the Academy ratio or a special case scenario).

I'm confused as to why a studio that -presumably- is in the business of making money, would screw their potential customers this way.

 

[Jon Martin]

Any alteration to how the film was projected in theaters is unacceptable no matter what terminology is technically correct.

True, but to call something pan and scan when it isn't is wrong.

Pan and scan actually changes the film, adds edits and pans that weren't there. It is a total reworking of the film.

Most of the transfers discussed here are either open matte or zoomed in to cut off information on the sides. That is a lot different than pan and scan.

 

[Sean Alaoui]

How much more can it actually cost to release the films as 4:3 on one side and widescreen on the other? I wish they would release all their bargain titles that way, I'd start buying them. And releasing a 2.35:1 film in pan&scan only is inexcusable.

 

[Mark Cappelletty]

Zooming in on an image is just as bad as pan-and-scan in my book; open matte is up for debate, but either way, they don't get past my front door.

I have plenty of MGM titles-- and would have more if they were more consistent about their releases.

 

[Drue Elrick]

Hey Ron - let me reflect on your (and, really, our) comments regarding Remo Williams...

RANT ON

Segue back a year or three on HTF. Myself as well as others express great interest in seeing Remo Williams released on DVD in its theatrical ratio. We've suffered with P'n'S VHS of this movie for too long. The amount of support for this particular movie on HTF is unprecidented given its cult status. We plead for it. We are specific on what we, as the cult following it, want to see in the DVD. This is even made aware to MGM through live chat(s).

After reading many, many pages, the person in charge of making this DVD happen would have to be thick as a brick not to already have the DVD planned out, knowing that the people want the widescreen ratio, anamorphic. And that they would buy the DVD in droves if marketed as such.

Part of the drive behind getting Remo on DVD are letters from people to MGM. Some from HTF, some not. I was one of them and I mentioned specifically my rabid interest in the movie and wanting to see the movie done justice on DVD (including its widescreen, anamorphic transfer). Given my understanding of Joe PNSDVD, they would not be the type to write in, asking for a cult movie like Remo, and specifically mentioning that they want it only in P'n'S. At most, they would say that they want the movie on DVD.

Given this information on our side, it seems logical to believe that once MGM has said they would release it all would be good.

Then someone at MGM makes the decision. What specifically and why, we don't know. Using an existing LD transfer or putting their faith in some BS marketing tripe or in Wal-Mart's "numbers." We can't change the past.

However, we have the choice to express our frustration. Most people do not think about it. Ron, however, is in an interesting position. He has some "power" in the industry given his contacts and his forum, the HTF. But Ron still has to play the political game that comes along with it.

In my opinion, the "hurt feelings" at MGM are nothing more than BS. If someone there has such thin skin they shouldn't be in Hollywood, let alone a studio, making such important decisions. In fact, the only way they COULD get up there in the power structure is to have the thick skin needed.

In my opinion, someone at MGM sees the numbers from actual sales of Remo. And while 'good', they clearly don't match up with their expectations. This is due in large part to the cult following not buying it, for the obvious reasons. MGM sees this as the cult not living up to their part of the 'bargain.' That MGM released the demanded movie in good faith. And now the cult has the audacity to complain. And Ron is at the head of that line. Who are they be so picky? They should be happy that we released it at all. Well, that means we won't do something like that again for a cult movie.

In the end, I think we can and should express our frustration. We should be pissed off. In cases like this, we hand-deliver an outline for a successful DVD release and someone goes and decides to crater it. Someone at MGM is, in all likelyhood, manipulating Ron in order to reduce some pressure on them. They should be ashamed for doing this. The blame lays on their shoulders. Take some responsibilty.

MGM - step up to the plate and use these (especially Remo) as opportunities to do things right from the get go. The cult following is who will buy these types of DVDs. Not the general public. Yeah, the words hurt for a short time. But what will hurt you, MGM, MORE is if you keep this up. Someone made a wrong decision and instead of fixing it for this and future releases, someone is towing the line and hurting MGM's bottom line.
RANT OFF

To MGM: REMOVED if you won't release Remo Williams the right way. I won't be buying it or any other 'cult' film if it isn't in the correct aspect ratio. Like the adage goes: Piss someone off about a product and they'll tell ten other people not to buy it. And cult followings are more close in their communications so you'll be damned sure that the word will get out like wildfire to the public at large and your sales will suffer as a result. Do it right the first time, MGM.

To Ron: The HTF is your and Parker's baby. It gives you unprecidented power in guiding what kind of DVD product gets out there. Be DAMNED proud at what you and the HTF have accomplished. Nothing short of bribes to the right people usually gets the response we have seen. Hell, look at FOX. They took an interest and listened. Now they profit from their TV season box sets. They profit from enhanced DVDs. The positive feedback gets around and the people here tell others.

So, don't back down on your complaints and criticism. OR on your kudos and compliments. Those companies that want to make money will take this free customer information, feedback, and requests and then profit. Those that do not will not listen to you and us. And if they only listen when flattering praise is given - even though the product is shoddy - we are wasting our time. Take faith in yourself, the HTF, and those companies who do listen. Ultimately, if we don't voice our opinion (positive OR negative) then we can't expect change to occur or to get the things we want.

 

[Jon Martin]

Then someone at MGM makes the decision. What specifically and why, we don't know. Using an existing LD transfer or putting their faith in some BS marketing tripe or in Wal-Mart's "numbers." We can't change the past.

That is just not the case. Wal Mart has no problem carrying widescreen DVDs.

Besides, if MGM will make a widescreen version of a little seen film like MYSTERY DATE, then there is something else involved in making the decision. .

 

[Drue Elrick]

Correct, Wal-Mart has no problem carrying widescreen when the option is there. What I am referring to are Wal-Mart's numbers which tend to skew the choices. A company like MGM can see a pan'n'scan version outsell a widescreen version in Wal-Mart and (incorrectly) conclude that that is what EVERYONE wants. Or rather, they won't necessarily take into account the numbers of 'smaller' retailers like Best Buy, that may show the same title having the widescreen outselling the pan'n'scan by a large margin.

 

[Glenn Overholt]

I am sure that MGM can get the figures for the number of copies sold on line and at B & M stores, which should give them a fairly accurate total. Just how many are sitting on the shelves is another question.

So, if MGM thinks that producing a P&S only title will sell enough to justify the rest of us NOT BUYING IT, then more power to them, but they are making huge mistake. I am considering not muying any more MGM titles at all, until they let us know that they have 'wised up', and are going to do what the director's intended, and put them out in their OAR. I do wonder how many director's feel that they have been insulted at their P&S/FF versions.

Glenn

 

[Chris_Morris]

That is just not the case. Wal Mart has no problem carrying widescreen DVDs.

Only partially true. On new releases, they will carry both, but as titles get older, or are re-released (as in a price drop) Wal-Mart tends to only reorder P&S. Which is why they only have P&S Jurassic Park I+III, Jaws, The Mummy Returns, and The Scorpian King, all of which I would purchase at the $14.44 price if the OAR was available. And there are newer titles that I have noticed this on too.

Chris

 

[Stephen_J_H]

They will also order fewer widescreen copies &/or hide them. I found this to be the case when shopping for Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets.

 

[WillG]

Redundant Post - See Below

 

[WillG]

I do wonder how many director's feel that they have been insulted at their P&S/FF versions.

You know I think that Directors should get more personally involved in the way their films are presented on DVD. Some director quotes get mentioned here from time to time. Interesting though, Martin Scorcese has publicly stated that ideally films should be watched in WS. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think an MAR version of any of his films even exists on DVD. John Carpenter has publically annouced his disdain for P&S and even refered to P&S supporters as Idiots. He then said if they must have P&S, just throw an extra disc into the package. And I don't think any one of his films has a separate P&S release. I don't know if this is merely coincidence or these directors had some pull (my facts may not even be right, but I'm going off memory) We know for a fact that Kubrick has requested his films to be formatted certain ways on DVD, and recently Roger Donaldson got personally involved in how he wanted "The Recruit" to be presented and there is only a single version of that film to show for it (whether it be right or wrong). But it is a shame that more directors are not coming out about this, even many of those with the most clout. Spielberg doesn't seem to mind P&S versions of his films coming out. Hell, his OWN STUDIO is putting out his recent films. I was somewhat dissapointed that the "Indiana Jones" films are getting a P&S release. I don't think Paramount could have made Spielberg and Lucas agree to this involutarily. I don't think the studios are going to be much help, because if Wal-Mart wants P&S, Wal-Mart is going to get P&S. MGM did used to show examples, but many of those were GROSSLY incorrect (I remember the booklet for "DR NO" that "Showed" that the film was anamorpic scope) Even if a director does not have the necessary clout, at least maybe somehow get something on the DVD or just some word out that expresses the customer should really go for the WS.

Now that I am done with that, a side note. Anybody know yet how The Two Towers dual versions are comparatively selling. I was at Wal-Mart today and saw many P&S and not a single W/S. Costco had a big WS display, but has really seemed to scale back the number of WS on the shelves (I had to lift up one of the cardboard racks just to find a WS copy underneath. I don't know enought about retail stores to determine if this means that a lot of WS sold or it is just really being scaled back because more P&S are selling

 

[Lev-S]

It's simple -
No OAR = NO SALE

 

[Robert Holloway]

Dear MGM

Widescreen seems to outsell pan and scam
I will not buy your P&S discs
I'm trying to be polite
but surely this cannot be sooo difficult

Rob