Hello, Fox! (1 Viewer)

[Robert Crawford]

Randy,
My comment was meant as a general statement about recent dvd releases and therefore, not inclusive to just this particular dvd release alone.




Crawdaddy

 

[Joe Caps]

Whether its a good idea or not - the point is, a retrospective documentary was one of the features announced for Hello Dolly. If you're not going to give it to us, DON'T SAY THAT YOU ARE. Simple.

 

[Greg_M]

Quote - "I think we're being a little too hard on Fox in this thread. As people have pointed out, this is not an A title or even a highly regarded classic film."

Uhm, you can stop KISSING UP (really!)

Any extra on a DVD is always welcome. That's not the point (never was) My big gripe has always been the announcing and the waiting of "All That Jazz" and tying "Hello Dolly!" to that promotion since day one. (ALL THAT JAZZ was held up for years to add extra features, now "Star!" is being held up to add extra features - all this to tie into a "Chicago" (Miramax) DVD release date.

This wasn't a promotion that FOX slapped together after the "Chicago" DVD was announced, FOX has been planning this all along, which makes canceling an announced retrospective all the more puzzling - makes FOX look like they don't have their act together. Very sloppy on their part.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Greg,
Be careful, you're starting to cross that line! All of us, at one time or another have been unhappy with certain studios because we felt slighted in their dvd releases of particular films.




Crawdaddy

 

[Robert Harris]

For the record, All That Jazz, which is also a beautiful disc (and also not a Special Edition) containing some interview material as well as other odd and ends...

was not held up for years to add extras.

It was held up as the elements had been abused and needed restoration, before which nothing could be done. Schawn Belston and his team at Fox have done a yeomanlike job of bringing this film back from the edge. The final result being a terrific representation on home video --

as well as 35mm commercial prints, which is what restoration is all about.

RAH

 

[Peter Kline]

On this documentary.... when did Fox announce it would be made and included in the DVD? You know sometimes things don't work out.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

....makes FOX look like they don't have their act together. Very sloppy on their part.

I can assure you that perhaps more than any other
studio, Fox has had their act together for a long
time. In fact, no other studio that I have dealt
with has cared more about what their consumers
think and what goes into the end product than Fox
Home Video.

Many times a studio will announce an upcoming
release with the utmost best intentions. However,
there are many pitfalls that can happen from
planning stages to finished product. Maybe talent
suddenly has become unavailable for planned added
content or perhaps a licensing situation prevents
a studio from making promised material available.

I am sure when a studio has the best intentions
in mind for its consumer, and an unfortunate
circumstance prevents them from including a
promised feature -- the last thing they need to
hear is that "they don't have their act together."

It's reasons such as this that Peter Staddon
(Fox VIP) doesn't participate here anymore. His
absence is a great loss to this forum. He is
missed!

 

[John Hodson]

I can assure you that perhaps more than any other
studio, Fox has had their act together for a long
time. In fact, no other studio that I have dealt
with has cared more about what their consumers
think and what goes into the end product than Fox
Home Video.

Fox Studio Classics - need I say more? (Other than thank you Fox ) The way that Fox is treating its back catalogue in R1 is an example to practically every other studio.

---
So many films, so little time...

 

[oscar_merkx]

I am in complete agreement with you there John as I am discovering so many classics that I heard about but never had a chance to see these as they were not available.

Since buying The Day The Earth Stood Still or Journey to the Centre to the Earth (I know this is not a Fox Studio Classic), my buying list tends to find more of the old classics and this can only be a positive thing.

 

[Greg_M]

Quote: "You know I'm always amazed at the hostility shown when a film released on DVD (whether an A or B title) is not given the so-called deluxe treatment with lots of extras. Isn't it the film that is most important?"

I believe many members are missing the point some of us are trying to make. I also would say they we are not being hostile (I'm not, anyway). We Do pat FOX on the back when they do a good job, but by the same token we have the right to also vent our frustrations when they don't (Otherwise this forum would become biased and nothing more than another avenue for studio promotion. (Check out Today's "DVDfile" threat regarding edge enchancement)

In the past I have been frustrated with these two FOX titles but only because (living in Los Angeles and visiting Dave's Studio Day the first few years DVD came out) Fox kept saying "All That Jazz" & "Dolly" would be released that year(1999)they weren't. The next year they said in 2000, again no DVDs then 2001 etc...

While members in Ohio and other parts of the country have little knowlege of this and therefore no reason to be frustrated, some of us do and it is understandable knowing the history behind some of these titles why such announcments are frustrating.

Many of us also hear of projects being worked on, through friends or co-workrers in the industry, which are announced then released sans the extras. I can see where the the average member would post along these lines:

"I think we're being a little too hard on Fox in this thread. As people have pointed out, this is not an A title or even a highly regarded classic film (put it this way, it's not Citizen Kane). For Fox to work so hard on just the transfer for this disc and to put it out at such a low retail price shows that they deserve some credit."

And FOX does deserve credit MAJOR credit for the new tranfer and the low price. Though the members who post these praises don't know the back story. They can't possibly (some do). My hostility -if any- is aimed at these unknowing responses, (I have little patience for those) and I'm sorry if I attack you, I should understand, and I do, which is why I'm spelling it out.)


I guess those of us in the industry vent for other reasons.

Ron knows some of what goes on. We are really not trying to be hostile, just wondering why such slip ups occur (I won't even go into the Warner "Kiss Me Kate" DVD disaster)

FOX does good work (Though when "The Sound of Music" was released many others bitched about the edge enchancement, and many others still bitch about the fact the other R&H titles are not 16x9. Those in the Mid West may feel "at least they're released"


I can use "Star!" as a perfect example, since FOX knew they would tie in their musical DVDs to "CHICAGO" but they didn't relaize they had all these extras (From "THEIR" Special edition Laserdisc release) until members on this forum pointed it out to them.

It's great that they read the posts and added the extra (my only question: why didn't they realized all this on their own?)

I Would prefer Studios not list possible features or extras on a title until they are comfirmed. This way they are always welcome and no one feels something announced was being taken away. Since Studio day has gone with Dave's we won't get this information (And many chats have stoped also due to this) It's probably best that Studios don't announced titles they aren't sure about, or titles a year in advance. Other web sites also listed the "Dolly" retrospective, so one does wonder why it it's on the DVD (2 months before the release date) It's a Valid question to ignore it and just shut up would be much worse. (If it leaked out that George Lucas had "Stars Wars" and "The Empire Strikes Back" already transfered to DVD (Last year) but wouldn't released them until restoration on "Jedi" was completed (2006) many members would hit the ceiling).
AS FAR AS I KNOW THIS ISN'T THE CASE, but to make a point.


Members SHOULD point out problems with DVD tranfers etc, (sometimes the studios REALLY don't know) If a negative comment seems hostile then maybe it could be phrased better, but it should still be addressed. Some members are better at writing pros and cons, while others seem to comdem or "praise" for the wrong reasons.


Once again FOX does a great job on most of their DVD titles. "All That Jazz" just happened to be one of those most unfortunate mistakes: 1st announced, then held back for extras, then held back because a resoration was planned (Which is good)Then Ron posted a review of the restoration. Then the title was held back again and FOX mistakenly let it be known they missed their "window" (Hell did break lose on the forum for that post) Then the title was tied to "Chicago" making matters worse, "Hello Dolly" and "The Rose" were always tied to the "All That Jazz" promotion so not only was Jazz held up but so were "Dolly" and "The Rose" Then FOX added "Star!" then members pointed out the extras so "Star!" was pushed back (Which is good) but (sone of us still wonders why after all this)
So it is easy to see why some of us are frustrated (frustrated not hostile (we're not going to boycott FOX or attack Peter Staddon in the parking lot) Peter Staddon may not have had any say in this (probably some but he isn't the only governing force at FOX Home Video) And again we have congradulated FOX on other efforts repeatedly.


Sorry for the long post. Just wanted to clear up a few things

 

[David Lambert]

Greg, I understand your fustrations.

First, I'll ignore the geography-based idea of how much someone knows about what goes on in the DVD industry. Here in Memphis I seem to find out plenty, and sometimes pass information along to a particular pen-pal of mine in Hollywood - someone who's "in the biz", but doesn't worry about keeping up with DVD release info.


But to address the main topic, of "announcing" extras (or even leaking that they are being worked on), and then these supplements are nowhere in sight when the final product ships:

Okay, let's put the shoe on the other foot for a moment. When we look at a studio that tends to be closed-mouthed about what the future holds (Columbia is a good example; Artisan can be another), we end up begging them for scraps of information. And I do mean "begging".

In those situations we often tell those studios, "Please...tell us ANYTHING about your plans for if that property is coming to DVD, when you think it will be out, and what you think will be on it besides the feature".

And here's the kicker: we tell them "tell us what your plans are, and we know things could change so WE WON'T HOLD YOU TO THEM".






But here's the problem: When another studio (say, Fox or Paramount) tries to be forthcoming with their plans, and then things change or get cancelled at the last minute, then we collectively beat the crap out of them and fuss at them. Because we are holding them to the original plans.

I call foul. We can't have it both ways!




Let me give you a "real-time" example of that: In the last HTF chat Peter Staddon did, he said that they "would try to make the numbers work for both Lost In Space and Time Tunnel in 2003" (quote from memory), and maybe even said other things that - at least to me - tied both of those series together as releases around the same timeframe. Well, Lost In Space has been sort of pre-announced. For 2004. Oh, well...things changed. Where's any sort of announcement for Time Tunnel? Oh, there isn't one. Something must have happened to it. Shoot...oh, well.

You see? "Oh, well" is the only correct attitude. You can't miss what you never had, right?

 

[Robert Harris]

I've mentioned previously that there have been many, many instances in the home video industry (even more with the advent of DVD) in which the left hand has absolutely no idea what the right is going to do.

And I'm referring here specifically to product design, marketing and production.

I can understand a certain amount of frustration (and David Lambert) has maade the correct case here) when a favorite title is announced as something special, only to have it hit shelves as a bare boned effort.

The reality of the situation for DVD, unlike either VHS or laserdisc, is that, for all the attempts at the pre-visualization of a DVD release and what it might or might not contain, NO ONE KNOWS ANYTHING.

It is not until the production makes it way to compression and authoring that one can know precisely what will fit on a single disc, and how quality will be affected.

We've come a very long way since the early releases five or six years ago, and anyone who has taken a look back at them will immediately recognize the fact that many were not particularly well produced. Comprerssion was too low, film elements and transfer quality did not meet the needs of the format, and the final results were far below what anyone would find as even an average release today.

Which means...

that with higher bit rates and less compression we can fit less and less on a disc.

Which in turn means, that any comments made two or three years ago, not to mention earlier, can no longer be considered valid. No matter how open and honest the marketing people want to be, unfortunately sometimes raising the public's expectations about what could be fit on a disc, it can't be done.

Even worse, to hit a price point, and not roll over to a second disc, limitations must be put in place.

An example:

Several years ago, when Criterion was putting together the programming for the Spartacus release, there was a "wish-list" of elements which everyone wanted to see on the release. One was DTS audio.

Once compression tests were performed, it was discovered (and could not have been known before those tests) that the extra .750, or however many bits necessary for the track, would have damaged the picture quality. DTS had to be the first thing to go.

The point that I'm making here, is that no matter how much the design and marketing arms of the studios would like to prognosticate as to precisely what will fit on a disc, they don't know, and can't know, until the actual compression tests are performed from the final transfer.

All of which ties neating into David Lambert's comments.

The easiest way for a studio to handle the situation is to say absolutely nothing about the precise elements to be found on any release, and simply allow the public the advance notice that on a particular date, "X" title will be released as either a regular release or a SE.

And all of this makes the jobs done by the marketing executives, like Mr. Staddon all the more difficult.

How can one be expected to have an on-line chat, answer a plethora of queries about future releases as designed and what the INTENT may be, when the technical arm has not yet been consulted, no transfser has yet been performed, no compression tests have occurred, and leave having all those requesting information happy.

You can't.

Especially if you are being open and honest about releases coming down the production line.

The other problems come down to market share, market penetration for vault titles and price points...

all with the knowledge that the audience for titles like Hello, Dolly! and All That Jazz may be limited to specfic groups; either Streisand fans, musical fans (which almost does not apply to Jazz), or those with an interest in films of the period.

In a marketing sense, one can attempt to find some way of attaching a release to somethng else. Whether this may be an attachment to the 4 disc Warner Streisand set or piggy-backing on to the release of Chicago, this is all well and good. Anything helps.

In the case of Dolly, as can be read in this thread, there are members who won't go near this release for any number of reasons. My comments had little to do with the actual film and more to do with the quality of the release, which is a key to future large format releases.

This will not be a million seller. The price point has been hit to perfection, making it almost a POP release.

Likewise with All That Jazz. It hits a price point of just over ten dollars, making it accessible to everyone. But as good a film as it is, and it is a fine film, it will not be to everyone's taste.

Which means that neither of these films is a candidate for a two disc set and a higher price point.

In the end we have two films, both very much taking cues from the personalities involved with their creations; each in its own way possibly not being to the taste of "everyman"; but each being beautifully representative of its film release -- beautifully mastered, transferred, compressed and authored for just a bit more than ten dollars per disc. This would not have occured several years ago.

As to what we might call "pre-announcements."

They can be a dangerous thing.

The studio marketing gurus should be welcomed here with open arms, but if they are to visit and interact, they cannot be placed in a position in which comments that they make, which would come from "latest information" will be repeated back to them in the future with a "but you promised" attitude.

The industry simply can't work that way. The lead time does not permit it.

Perhaps if there was an overall understanding that information offered was more for discussion of what may come in the future and not something that would be taken as hard facts, we might see some of these execs re-visit HTF without the fear of having their comments rattled back to them six or twelve months down the line when the information shared turns out not to be totally accurate in production.

RAH

 

[Mark Zimmer]

One really hopes that Fox will, as mentioned earlier in the thread, go back and give such good treatment to the Rodgers & Hammerstein classics. Oklahoma! in particular is frankly hideous in every way imaginable.

But to be fair, those discs date from the days before Fox got religion. Their Studio Classics series is exemplary in just about every respect; while the Biography episodes have been hit or miss (the Anastasia one is the best of the bunch and essential viewing), the commentaries have been uniformly excellent. I for one like the old Fox Movietone newsreel footage they include too--that's the sort of stuff that would never see the light of day otherwise.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Firstly, on behalf of myself and every other member of the forum, I'd like to personally thank Robert Harris for his valued contributions to this forum.

One really hopes that Fox will, as mentioned earlier in the thread, go back and give such good treatment to the Rodgers & Hammerstein classics. Oklahoma! in particular is frankly hideous in every way imaginable.

You betcha.

 

[David Lambert]

Robert, thank you for responding to my comments and adding to them a very detailed look at the studio/producer side of things. All of it was very insightful, and the last portion really hits the bottom line of the "expectations" issue:




Unfortunately, I fear that there could be no "overall understanding" which would continuously work going forward. This site and others have new membership and a certain amount of turnover of old membership, under which such an understanding would erode.

In, say, a year's time (two at most), noone will remember that this conversation ever took place. I would suggest that it be archived and/or put into a FAQ somewhere. But who will recall to ask others to read it?


Having said that, I feel that this has been an excellent thread, and yours in particular is an excellent post. At least perhaps the readers of it will gain some insight about what is being said. As always, thanks.

 

[Jesse Blacklow]

A little off-topic here, but I for one would love to make Robert Harris' post above a sticky in this forum. Perhaps even include in an introductory email to new members!

 

[Thomas T]

The fact of the matter is that the studios, Fox included, owe us the best transfer, picture and sound, that are available from the best materials at hand. That's it! Nothing else!

Whining about the studios not providing us with chapter inserts, trailers, commentaries, retrospectives etc. make us seem like at best, cry babies and at worst, ungrateful brats. Sure, those things would be nice but they are not reason for the DVD itself. It's all about the movie! If a company like Artisan provides a sub-par transfer like The Quiet Man when we know better elements are available, then jump all over them I say. But when a studio puts out a good looking crisp transfer with solid sounding audio, it's just churlish to whine about what you didn't get.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

A little off-topic here, but I for one would love to make Robert Harris' post above a sticky in this forum. Perhaps even include in an introductory email to new members!

You know, that is a superb idea!

I could rework the WELCOME letter to new members
and if Mr. Harris gives us permission to use his
words (with credit), perhaps we can change the
negative attitudes around here as of late.

 

[Robert Harris]

Ron...

Feel free to cut and paste at will if you feel its helpful.

RAH

 

[Peter Kline]

In regards to the Todd AO (70mm) version of Oklahoma! Back in the 70s (I believe) the Samuel Goldwyn company acquired theatrical distribution rights and did some restoration on the 70mm version. I saw the film at the Egyptian and it drew pretty decent audiences for its limited run. At the time they bemoaned the fact that the original elements were not in particularly good shape. The 35mm version, which had been available on home video was in fine shape, but as we all know it is a different film. The major problem with the large format Oklahoma! and the other films Fox released at the time on DVD (excluding the original State Fair) were that they were not anamorphic - is that correct?