What's new

Reggie W

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 31, 2004
Messages
8,691
Location
Agua Verde
Real Name
Pike Bishop
For quite some time I thought the idea of owning a physical copy of a film was a pretty amazing thing. Plus once you own it, you have full control over it.

I see the benefit in streaming in that you don't have to store a collection in your home and I did think that they would never do something like remove material from a picture or refuse to show a picture at all on a streaming service but now over time, I have been proven quite wrong about this.

I have seen streaming films shown edited, with material removed, and also there are things that just will not be shown on a streaming service for a variety of reasons.

Combining this with hearing younger generations on podcasts absolutely trashing older films and filmmakers for not adhering to standards of today when they made films in the past...well...at this stage I do believe things could get very selective as to what gets shown via streaming services.

I have heard more than one working filmmaker say "Just wait until the millennials are running things completely. They have absolutely no problem erasing the past."

Now that may sound like "OK boomer!" stuff or I am an old man screaming at the sky and I thought that at first too, but the truth is, many films I have loved are not considered appropriate viewing, not just due to content, but due to the people that made them or who acted in them.

John Wayne is not loved by younger generations for the most part and what they know of him they very much do not like.

One of my all time favorite films, The Wild Bunch, will be incredibly hated if they discover anything about several of the people that made it, never mind the content of the film.

I don't think a person from a younger generation would prioritize making sure that film is well preserved nor available to watch if they discover anything about the picture or people that made it. I probably should not even write about it here.

I thought there would be a respect within the industry for film history and older films but the way things are trending is, it is better to erase than preserve.

I would say hold on to your hardcopies and I don't mean to sound paranoid.
 
Last edited:

ManW_TheUncool

His Own Fool
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2001
Messages
8,987
Location
The BK
Real Name
ManW
Basically, if it was shown in theatres, semi-popular, and isn't completely out of my or my spouse's interest areas, we get it. I'd say the two genres (loosely defined as they are these days) that tend to have the fewest purchases are comedies and so-called "torture porn" horror/action (e.g. the Saw and Purge movies).

We also try to avoid releases with famously bad transfers or other production issues. I rely on reviewers here (especially Robert Harris, of course) for this.

I did somewhat similarly (but might be somewhat more selective usually sticking w/ movies that at least get 70% fresh rating at RottenTomatoes)... except I usually waited for sales in most cases, not usually buying during release week, and switched some of that to digitals on <=$5 iTunes sales nowadays. IF it's something I (and especially the family) actually wanted to see in theaters, but missed it, then I'm more inclined to not wait for a sale beyond release week. Otherwise, when I get something will vary a lot depending on how much I want to see it sooner than later to determine what kind of price I'm willing pay...

I do get (the better) comedies though, but no "torture porn" in general.

I rarely ever go for alternate collector's editions that don't actually come w/ different additional content on the discs -- I do make few exceptions when the price diff is very small, but that doesn't happen often.

_Man_
 

Josh Dial

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2000
Messages
4,073
Real Name
Josh Dial
except I usually waited for sales in most cases, not usually buying during release week

I do the same thing for a lot of catalogue or "old" releases. I don't buy them on day one unless they are already on sale (which seems to happen more and more these days). I don't need to pay full price and buy "Some Like it Hot" on day one: I'll wait for a sale (and I did!).

The same goes for new movies that we recently saw in the theatre. We saw 22 movies in the theatre in 2021. When "In the Heights" came out on UHD, for example, I waited a few weeks for a sale. We had just watched it in the theatre only two months prior. Sometimes, though, I'll pay "full price" for a new release on release day if it's a buzzy movie that we haven't seen so that I can join in the discussion here while it's hot.
 

ManW_TheUncool

His Own Fool
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2001
Messages
8,987
Location
The BK
Real Name
ManW
I have seen streaming films shown edited, with material removed, and also there are things that just will not be shown on a streaming service for a variety of reasons.

Can you provide specific examples of this? I'd like to know since I do buy some on digital (usually via iTunes). I haven't heard of any actual instances of this for purchased digitals so far.

Combining this with hearing younger generations on podcasts absolutely trashing older films and filmmakers for not adhering to standards of today when they made films in the past...well...at this stage I do believe things could get very selective as to what gets shown via streaming services.

I have heard more than one working filmmaker say "Just wait until the millennials are running things completely. They have absolutely no problem erasing the past."

Now that may sound like "OK boomer!" stuff or I am an old man screaming at the sky and I thought that at first too, but the truth is, many films I have loved are not considered appropriate viewing, not just due to content, but due to the people that made them or who acted in them.

John Wayne is not loved by younger generations for the most part and what they know of him they very much do not like.

One of my all time favorite films, The Wild Bunch, will be incredibly hated if they discover anything about several of the people that made it, never mind the content of the film.

I don't think a person from a younger generation would prioritize making sure that film is well preserved nor available to watch if they discover anything about the picture or people that made it. I probably should not even write about it here.

I thought there would be a respect within the industry for film history and older films but the way things are trending is, it is better to erase than preserve.

I would say hold on to your hardcopies and I don't mean to sound paranoid.

Yes, certainly, for something I feel important enough (and especially possibly at such risk), I would definitely want physical media and not rely on (streaming) digital purchases.

_Man_
 

Reggie W

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 31, 2004
Messages
8,691
Location
Agua Verde
Real Name
Pike Bishop
I'd like to provide a list but have not kept one. One film I went to watch recently because I heard them talk about it on The Movies That Made Me podcast was Bad Luck Banging or Loony Porn, which granted is a foreign film and contains graphic sex...two things not appreciated by an American audience but I mean the film is available streaming, but strangely censored. Click on the link below to see the actual rainbow colored pages that cover the onscreen activity:


Now, I thought that was a joke but no, that's apparently how it is being shown in the US. I attempted to watch it, saw these screens, and thought "Is this supposed to be happening?" and did an internet search, which turned up some really pissed off people that had tried more than one service and they all showed it with the rainbow joke inserts covering the video.

This is probably an extreme example because it involves graphic sexual content but this is what the film is about and how it was made. So, just don't show it if this is a problem. I mean I guess there were several services that will not show it due to the sex.

I just gave up on the film and have not bothered with attempting to see it again.

There are other films that are being shown streaming with parts removed. Probably an internet search would reveal them. Sometimes it is said to be just a mistake, they got whatever version they were given and sometimes it may be intentional.

In truth, if I own the film I don't attempt to stream it. So, mostly what I stream are things I don't have, just want to check out, and probably don't want to purchase.

I think the concern going forward would be that as people discover pictures or scenes they don't like they can just make the decision to remove them. Which in truth is fair, if a company wants to erase or change or ignore something they own that is their right.
 

Capt D McMars

Movie Explorer
Premium
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
1,726
Location
Colorado
Real Name
Todd Doc Sigmier
For quite some time I thought the idea that owning a physical copy of a film was a pretty amazing thing. Plus once you own it, you have full control over it.

I see the benefit in streaming in that you don't have to store a collection in your home and I did think that they would never do something like remove material from a picture or refuse to show a picture at all on a streaming service but now over time, I have been proven quite wrong about this.

I have seen streaming films shown edited, with material removed, and also there are things that just will not be shown on a streaming service for a variety of reasons.

Combining this with hearing younger generations on podcasts absolutely trashing older films and filmmakers for not adhering to standards of today when they made films in the past...well...at this stage I do believe things could get very selective as to what gets shown via streaming services.

I have heard more than one working filmmaker say "Just wait until the millennials are running things completely. They have absolutely no problem erasing the past."

Now that may sound like "OK boomer!" stuff or I am an old man screaming at the sky and I thought that at first too, but the truth is, many films I have loved are not considered appropriate viewing, not just due to content, but due to the people that made them or who acted in them.

John Wayne is not loved by younger generations for the most part and what they know of him they very much do not like.

One of my all time favorite films, The Wild Bunch, will be incredibly hated if they discover anything about several of the people that made it, never mind the content of the film.

I don't think a person from a younger generation would prioritize making sure that film is well preserved nor available to watch if they discover anything about the picture or people that made it. I probably should not even write about it here.

I thought there would be a respect within the industry for film history and older films but the way things are trending is, it is better to erase than preserve.

I would say hold on to your hardcopies and I don't mean to sound paranoid.
I feel your pain, I too come from a generation where the fantasy of actually owning a copy of my favorate films or tv shows was just that, a fantasy. All I can say to those in the camp of ignorence is "All those that fail to learn from history, are bond to repeat it". The truth is that it is imparative to save, restore and archive Films and thier history for all of us, with all of films "the good the bad and the ugly"...not judging by our own standards. Humans aren't perfect and niether were the films made by these amazing artists and genius storytellers.

What I've learned as I have aged is, don't take it personnaly, try to be as empathetic as possible and know when to walk away. I have observed that about ever 5-8 years everything old is new again. So I always try to eer on the side of hopefullness. Believeing in Dawins law of stupidity, never argue with an idiot...ingnorence is not bliss...but ignorence can be cured.
All it takes somtimes is being able willigness to learn and recognize when you're wrong.
And in this case, they just haven't go there yet...
 

Worth

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
4,558
Real Name
Nick Dobbs
...There are other films that are being shown streaming with parts removed. Probably an internet search would reveal them. Sometimes it is said to be just a mistake, they got whatever version they were given and sometimes it may be intentional...
But that specific example doesn't seem to have anything to do with streaming per se. It sounds like that was a decision made by the distributor of the film and not any specific service, in which case a disc release would most likely be the same. I know Disney+ has censored what it considered some objectionable material in movies like Splash, but I haven't heard of any censorship on services like iTunes which allow you to rent and buy digital titles.
 

BobO'Link

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 3, 2008
Messages
9,884
Location
Mid-South
Real Name
Howie
Aaaah... so THAT's really why disc sales have slumped over the last decade and the market kept shrinking... Y'all are not pulling your weight anymore here! :lol:

Can't say I blame yah (at all!)... as I've kinda been looking to do likewise for quite some time myself, but I just keep getting reeled back in (as I mentioned above)...

I would say though I rarely ever (blind)buy titles that I don't (believe I'd) end up at least appreciating, if not always liking a lot, though... that is, if I do get around to watching them -- yeah, like many here, I have an embarrassingly large backlog as well...

_Man_
Well... I *did* do *two* rather large (8+ discs each) orders from KINO's latest sale - a few of which are blind buys (but stuff in my wheelhouse so to speak).
I see. I almost never buy titles that I have never seen.

I don't buy many movies in general, except for some very top favorites with high re-watchability, usually comedy and adventure types.

With TV collections on the other hand, I'll buy just about anything that I associate with the slightest twinge of nostalgia. That's where I have a backlog of discs I need to get around to watching.
I used to purchase just about anything on DVD if the price was low enough ($5 or less) but confine the majority of BR purchases to those which have high rewatchability for me. I've only purchased *one* movie on DVD in the past year (or maybe two) - it's a "B" SF title from Warner Archives which has never had a BR release. Now that I caved and made the purchase it'll likely get a BR upgrade...

TV series are my achilles heel. If the price is low enough I'll purchase just about any TV series, no matter the genre, from the 40s/50s/60s and certain genres from the 70s on.
I still buy basically every new "major" release (including catalogue titles). For some movies I buy multiple copies to get different editions and cover art.

I also buy a fair number of "niche" releases from Kino, Severin, A24, Second Sight, Vinegar Syndrome, and Arrow.

In my entire life I have "purchased" exactly zero digital movies, and rented exactly one ("Drive My Car" because I wanted to watch it before the Oscars and it wasn't shown in Calgary).
I purchase very few new "major" or even "minor" release titles. Most are recycled scripts or involve cast I just don't like.

The bulk of what I purchase these days would easily be considered "niche" titles as they're mostly classics and "B" movies from the 30s/40s/50s/60s.

I currently "own" roughly 140 digital movies - all "purchased" with that "funny money" Amazon calls "digital credits." At one point Amazon gave you one with *every* order so I ordered *everything* individually to maximize those credits. They're much harder to earn these days but I still manage to get enough for a few titles a year. Without exception my son gets *all* of the digital codes that come in movies/TV series I purchase. I've never rented a digital movie and am likely to never do so as for the cost of most rentals I can normally just purchase a physical copy. That affords a much larger window in which to do the viewing and if it's a crap movie it gets tossed/given away.
 

Reggie W

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 31, 2004
Messages
8,691
Location
Agua Verde
Real Name
Pike Bishop
But that specific example doesn't seem to have anything to do with streaming per se. It sounds like that was a decision made by the distributor of the film and not any specific service, in which case a disc release would most likely be the same. I know Disney+ has censored what it considered some objectionable material in movies like Splash, but I haven't heard of any censorship on services like iTunes which allow you to rent and buy digital titles.

Yes, I am not blaming streaming, if something is removed (and Disney is probably the best example) it is a company decision. So, I do take into account that the streaming services (and they have said this) get what they get and show it.

The point is, if the scene or offending content is on your blu-ray, it is there you own it. With streaming as company leadership changes with whomever owns the property, they can remove or choose not to show whatever they want.
 

Reggie W

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 31, 2004
Messages
8,691
Location
Agua Verde
Real Name
Pike Bishop
I feel your pain, I too come from a generation where the fantasy of actually owning a copy of my favorate films or tv shows was just that, a fantasy. All I can say to those in the camp of ignorence is "All those that fail to learn from history, are bond to repeat it". The truth is that it is imparative to save, restore and archive Films and thier history for all of us, with all of films "the good the bad and the ugly"...not judging by our own standards. Humans aren't perfect and niether were the films made by these amazing artists and genius storytellers.

What I've learned as I have aged is, don't take it personnaly, try to be as empathetic as possible and know when to walk away. I have observed that about ever 5-8 years everything old is new again. So I always try to eer on the side of hopefullness. Believeing in Dawins law of stupidity, never argue with an idiot...ingnorence is not bliss...but ignorence can be cured.
All it takes somtimes is being able willigness to learn and recognize when you're wrong.
And in this case, they just haven't go there yet...

Yes, it is fun to actually own one of your favorite films. I still, because I am over 50, think "Wow, I own my own copy of Dr. Strangelove!" or Apocalypse Now, or The Wild Bunch or whatever.

The thing is as we move forward things in these pictures are now considered highly offensive. I watch Blazing Saddles with some people a few years back and a woman got up and yelled "Oh my god, this film is one of the most offensive things I have ever seen! How can you people sit here and watch this trash? Every copy of this should be burned!" and stormed out.

Here's the thing, she is not alone in her feelings. Lawyers run the world and they advise their clients on risk aversion and how to avoid getting sued. Well, offending people like this woman is now a risk.

So, while I always thought "Yeah, people that own these films will protect them and make sure they can be seen." now I am not so certain.

I think lawyers have become so central to the thinking of how to handle these things that the general tactic will be just to pretend it does not exist or to change it.

Man, I thought these pictures would not be altered to avoid offending people but hearing younger people discuss these pictures...well...they despise them.

I've heard The Searchers get totally ripped apart as a disgusting part of the past we should no longer have to endure and I sat there with my mouth hanging open thinking "Really?"

The way I have heard people in the business describe it is "Wait until the generation that is aware of the importance of these films is no longer running the show. Then the new generation will erase them."

Who knows if I will live to see that but people seem to think it is coming.

I just think it makes having a disc a better option.
 

PMF

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 6, 2015
Messages
5,531
Real Name
Philip
[…] The thing is as we move forward things in these pictures are now considered highly offensive. I watch Blazing Saddles with some people a few years back and a woman got up and yelled "Oh my god, this film is one of the most offensive things I have ever seen! How can you people sit here and watch this trash? Every copy of this should be burned!" and stormed out.[…]
Doubtful that Anne Bancroft ever stormed out on a Mel Brooks joke.

No offense, Reggie W, but some of these silly puffed-up joy killers within all our lives just simply need to go. You lucked out, as her exit was voluntary.:thumbs-up-smiley:
 
Last edited:

Reggie W

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 31, 2004
Messages
8,691
Location
Agua Verde
Real Name
Pike Bishop
Doubtful that Anne Bancroft ever stormed out on a Mel Brooks joke.

No offense, Reggie W, but some of the silly joy killers within all our lives just simply need to go.

I realize with each day that passes, only in my mid fifties, I am a dinosaur.
 
  • Insightful
Reactions: PMF

Reggie W

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 31, 2004
Messages
8,691
Location
Agua Verde
Real Name
Pike Bishop
No worries, Reggie, I’ll always drop by the museum to pay your bones a visit.:biggrin:

This is a real exchange I had with someone in their 20s:

Me- You really should take advantage of this opportunity. I was alive before cell phones, before the internet, and even before there were video games you could play at home. It's like being able to talk to someone that was alive during the Civil War or World War II. You can actually ask me questions and find out what it was like.

20 something- (looks horrified) That must have been awful. How could you deal with that?

Me-Well, instead of having Facebook or Twitter we would just go over to someone's house and yell insults at them in person.

20 something- That sounds terrible.

Me- Not really, having to actually get out meant we also got some exorcise.

20 something - Wow, that's good I was starting to feel really bad for you.
 

Worth

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
4,558
Real Name
Nick Dobbs
...The way I have heard people in the business describe it is "Wait until the generation that is aware of the importance of these films is no longer running the show. Then the new generation will erase them."
But in another thirty years, the next generation will berate them for how clueless and backward they are.
 
  • Agreed
Reactions: PMF

Capt D McMars

Movie Explorer
Premium
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
1,726
Location
Colorado
Real Name
Todd Doc Sigmier
Yes, it is fun to actually own one of your favorite films. I still, because I am over 50, think "Wow, I own my own copy of Dr. Strangelove!" or Apocalypse Now, or The Wild Bunch or whatever.

The thing is as we move forward things in these pictures are now considered highly offensive. I watch Blazing Saddles with some people a few years back and a woman got up and yelled "Oh my god, this film is one of the most offensive things I have ever seen! How can you people sit here and watch this trash? Every copy of this should be burned!" and stormed out.

Here's the thing, she is not alone in her feelings. Lawyers run the world and they advise their clients on risk aversion and how to avoid getting sued. Well, offending people like this woman is now a risk.

So, while I always thought "Yeah, people that own these films will protect them and make sure they can be seen." now I am not so certain.

I think lawyers have become so central to the thinking of how to handle these things that the general tactic will be just to pretend it does not exist or to change it.

Man, I thought these pictures would not be altered to avoid offending people but hearing younger people discuss these pictures...well...they despise them.

I've heard The Searchers get totally ripped apart as a disgusting part of the past we should no longer have to endure and I sat there with my mouth hanging open thinking "Really?"

The way I have heard people in the business describe it is "Wait until the generation that is aware of the importance of these films is no longer running the show. Then the new generation will erase them."

Who knows if I will live to see that but people seem to think it is coming.

I just think it makes having a disc a better option.
The way I look at it is, expect the worse, hope for the best and reality falls somwhere in between!!! But for me I'm buying my discs for my collection before the only edition available is a 4K 15 min Blazzing Saddles, LOL!!!
 

Kent K H

Second Unit
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
280
Can you provide specific examples of this? I'd like to know since I do buy some on digital (usually via iTunes). I haven't heard of any actual instances of this for purchased digitals so far.



Yes, certainly, for something I feel important enough (and especially possibly at such risk), I would definitely want physical media and not rely on (streaming) digital purchases.

_Man_
One specific example is Toy Story 2; Disney cut a gag from the film for Disney+ and for the 4K release because of the manner in which Lassitter behaved/left the company and they felt it suddenly was inappropriate. I purchased it on a then out of print blu ray in order to get the best release of the complete film. There's also the changes they made to some of their older package films, digitally editing out gags involving smoking, or in one case, completely editing out a sequence (Hatfields and McCoys.) Some of these changes were later reversed for blu ray releases, but not all of them. And of course they've changed Fantasia and Who Framed Roger Rabbit multiple times over the years, not just for streaming. If you don't have a physical copy, in some cases of the original 35 mm film, you don't have it as originally released. With movies being released direct-to-streaming and not getting any sort of physical release, we won't even have that in the future, but only pirate versions of films that could be censored to accommodate changing tastes.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum Sponsors

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
351,017
Messages
4,939,075
Members
142,962
Latest member
bannedjr
Recent bookmarks
0
Top