bad movies from Warner Bros.

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Charles L., Dec 22, 2001.

  1. Charles L.

    Charles L. Agent

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2001
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    I started noticing a few movies I've rented or bought didn't have a 5.1 soundtrack or the picuture quality wasn't up to dvd standards. Seems like Warner Bros. don't care what all of their movies look or sound like. I'm not paying 20 bucks for two channel surround. Compare both of the Ace Venture movies and see what I mean.
     
  2. Will K

    Will K Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2001
    Messages:
    1,011
    Likes Received:
    0
    Warner has put out a few bad ones, even if many of their releases are excellent. First, there's the OAR issues and some of their older DVD titles, which use old, rough-looking fullscreen transfers. Then some of their original widescreen releases came along and looked like dog poop, notably Unforgiven, inexcusable for a film of its caliber. I think that annoyed me the most is the anniversary edition of Caddyshack. Sure, they used a widescreen transfer, but the image is marred by speckles, dirt, grain, you name. It's amazing how companies like Anchor Bay can take an obscure thirty-year-old foreign title and make it look almost brand new, but major studios can't in many cases. Or they are just plain lazy. Furthermore, Caddyshack features 1-channel mono for its audio. Yep, you read that right, 1 channel. I wasn't asking for a full-blown 5.1 remix so the Kenny Loggins soundtrack and gopher sound effects would fill my room, but they could have done better. My 2 cents.
     
  3. Brett Hancock

    Brett Hancock Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2001
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree. Everytime My new Anchor Bay Limited Edition of what have you comes in the mail and I put it in for the first time the picture is amazing when you consider the age and quality of the transfer. If Anchor Bay can do it then Warner should take the time to do it also. They have some damn good releases to though. However the thing that ticks me off the most is there butchering of the South Park releases. That is my main beef other than that I can forgive. Peace
     
  4. Rain

    Rain Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2001
    Messages:
    5,015
    Likes Received:
    0
    Isn't it about time we stop beating on WB?

    Yeah, some of their earlier DVDs are pretty crappy, but lately they've been releasing excellent stuff that just looks and sounds terrific (Citizen Kane, Doctor Zhivago, Now Voyager, etc.).

    It certainly seems to me that they are now putting the effort forth to release quality stuff.

    Edited for spelling only.
     
  5. John Kilduff

    John Kilduff Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2001
    Messages:
    1,680
    Likes Received:
    26
    I'm with Rain. I'm holding out hope on some of the SEs they have in the works ("Victor/Victoria", "Amadeus", "Strange Brew", "Poltergeist", "Blade Runner", "The Color Purple" and hopefully the "Gremlins" movies). Every studio screws up sometimes.

    Sincerely,

    John "Anticipates lots of DVDs within the next few days" Kilduff
     
  6. CharlesD

    CharlesD Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2000
    Messages:
    1,493
    Likes Received:
    0
    To me, film is a primarily visual medium. SO long as the picture is in it's OAR is anamorphicaly enhanced if the ratio is 1.66 or greater, and is not a warmed-over LD transfer I am happy. I can live without the 5.1, but of course would prefer that it is inculded assuming the movie was released originaly with a 5.1 track. I am not interested in re-mixes.
     
  7. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,549
    Likes Received:
    179
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    1997 wasn't a good year for DVD's...but it did give the studios a chance to experiment and do better.

    The first year of VHS didn't have anything spectacular, so why should DVD?

    5.1 tracks are sometimes the closest a soundtrack can be to an original. For example...a movie such as Ben-Hur was released in a multi-track stereo format that cannot be duplicated with a Dolby Digital system.

    Most mono to 5.1 remixes fare pretty well. If the sound can be improved by remixing, that's fine. A movie such as North By Northwest benifits from a 5.1 remix, but a movie such as Manhattan wouldn't because it's dialogue-centered. If it enhances, remix; if it doesn't, leave it be. An example of poor 5.1 remixing are Fox Lorber's horrible "Cartoon Crazys" DVD's that simply dubbed in new sound effects over a scratchy mono track from a 16mm print!
     
  8. Jesse Skeen

    Jesse Skeen Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 1999
    Messages:
    4,289
    Likes Received:
    202
    "Caddyshack" was released in theatres with a mono soundtrack. If you're disappointed in not getting to show off your new 5.1 surround system, just remember there were probably several new Dolby Stereo theatre installations the time this came out that weren't happy about it either. But they just didn't do these sort of movies back then in stereo! I've become annoyed at Anchor Bay for doing 5.1 remixes of old low-budget movies and not including the untouched original mono track! (I don't like most of Warner's 5.1 remixes either, I would've preferred the original matrixed track on "Gremlins".)
     
  9. Larry Gardner

    Larry Gardner Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2000
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with Rain.

    Remember, in DVDs infancy, Warner was basically the sole supporter of DVDs. All the other studios either wouldn't commit, or only committed to DivX.

    To build this market, Warner had to basically decide what was marketable enough for profits (since rental was not even a concern). SO basically, B type movies were relegated to release as is. MOST of their high profile releases were 'retooled' for DVD for what was available at that time.

    Keep in mind, what we are seeing today is not what was available back then. Especially in DVD authoring programs or technically qualified people. This is a new 'art' in itself from the studios stand point.

    Also, at that time, Warner also was handling MGM DVDs (for distribution and authoring), as well as Orion and United Artists.

    They basically had their hands full. Most of the masters from these films were either in disrepair, missing elements, or not even available. Maybe if the studios had been keeping closer tabs on their product, things would have been better.

    Now that Warner has time to breath, with DVD now the hottest technology to hit Hollywood (even more so than VHS and LD), they can better focus on older films and give them their just due. That is why we are seeing Citizen Kane, North By Northwest, Ben Hur, and others given the attention they need.

    You just can't take 50 years of films and release them as they exist from their libraries. DVD authoring would not be able to showcase them correctly.

    This is a digital medium. A DVD is basically a computer program being executed to display moving images with sound. Most people do not understand this. WHat was acceptable for tape is titally unacceptable for DVD. It would basically be unwatchable. And until these films can be restored/mastered, the studios probably feel that since they have been released earlier in other media, that can hold people until a DVD version can be authored.

    HOWEVER, I do agree with others on audio mixes. If there is no difference in the audio mixes from 5.1 and the original elements, the original audio track should be provided.

    But Warner has NEVER addressed this to anyone's staisfaction - or even addressed it. I understand that if the restored soundtrack is different based on timing with the film, then the original soundtrack cannot be provided. It basically would be out-of-sync with the film. But if there is no difference, then the orginal track should be provided.

    But Warner has not addressed this. Basically, they do not use the available audio streams for anything (unless a separate commentary track is provided).

    This gets back to the DTS issue. Since the audio streams are not utilized, why no DTS? They provide DTS on their DVD Audio discs (e.g., America, Eagles, ...), but refuse to supply any for DVD Video.

    Hopefully, someday, Warner will address these issues - since they are not major issues ... so far all we get is silence!
     
  10. Carl Walker

    Carl Walker Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 1999
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    0
    I understand Warner's place in DVD history and I applaud them for their efforts...
    However, when they came on here for the chat a couple of months ago and stated that they didn't think that anyone cared whether a catalog comedy was released in OAR or not, I lost all respect that I had for them... WAKE UP, WARNER! [​IMG]
    You can drop the price point on Funny Farm and National Lampoon's Vacation to .01 but I will never buy them until you release them in OAR!!!
     
  11. Nick Graham

    Nick Graham Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2001
    Messages:
    1,406
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with Jesse...I mean I appreciate the effort...I love the fact I have a good copy of Bad Taste now, but couldn't the money put toward a DTS-ES mix on a no-budget movie like that have gone to a good charity or something?

    On some films there is only so much good you can do doing a 5.1 remix before you are just wasting cash that could go to much better causes.
     

Share This Page