Is "The Greatest Story Ever Told" BluRay a dissapointment? (1 Viewer)

[Bob Cashill]

DVD Savant weighs in, negatively. "This is one of the few discs I've reviewed that looks like an almost complete mistake." http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s3496told.html

 

[GMpasqua]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brandon Conway /forum/thread/310207/is-the-greatest-story-ever-told-bluray-a-dissapointment/30#post_3796261




As for MGM hurting their reputation, please. We're talking about a company that has been hanging on by mere threads for longer than my own existence of 32 years. Their current standard for most of these back-catalog releases now coming out is to release what they have and see what sticks. Someone obviously weighed the cost/benefit of releasing such an old master at this time to capitalize on the Easter holiday, and part of that evaluation surely factored in the enthusiast crowd's disappointment. But they've crunched the numbers and decided that money coming in from the less discerning would make it worth it.



Does it suck if the film you enjoy gets a sub-par treatment? Certainly. It all boils down to where you draw your personal line in the sand. For me, it completely depends film-to-film, what other means I have of seeing it, the cost of the product, etc.



As for MGM hurting their reputation???? That's the only thing MGM/UA has as an asset right now. They need to release top quality to gain consumer confidence and start making profits. Releasing bad product is not going to help a company get out of the red

 

[GMpasqua]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Calvert /forum/thread/310207/is-the-greatest-story-ever-told-bluray-a-dissapointment/30#post_3796266






You keep repeating the business side over and over and it's not like anyone doesn't know that. You do this all the time in countless threads. Why is MGM's financial condition relevant to the discussion? Are we supposed to cut companies slack for crap products because they're hanging on by a thread? That's their damn fault, not mine. If they can't provide quality it would be best if they went away.





I agree if MGM is going to release crap then they should go away. Criterion would never release a sub stand disc - ever, their biggest Asset is their reputation for quality (and why they can get away with charging higher prices)





If a company releases crap and tells us they're hurting - well... boo-hoo. If your hurting you're going to hurt more by dumping trash on the consumer. Someone at MGM should have canceled or pulled this disc before it was released to consumers. I have now canceled several MGM upcoming releases and have held off on others, and unless the reviews are stellar I will not be buying them. No more blind buys for MGM!!!!



Brandon if you were CEO of MGM your theory just collapsed if I am your consumer





The truth hurts, but companies that turn their heads on the truth find themselves facing bankruptcy

 

[GMpasqua]

Releasing 30 films in 60 months to blu-ray??? MGM stick to just a few and give them the quality they deserve. Otherwise only release them to DVD.



Sony has released maybe a dozen catalog titles over the last 3 years.

SONY isn't just sticking sub-standard transfer on Blu-ray and hoping for the best, they are giving the consumer the best and when I do buy SONY I know I am buying quality



(Though "[COLOR= #0000ff]Lawrence of Arabia[/COLOR]" is at least another year away - ([COLOR= #0000ff]50th Anniversary [/COLOR]tie-in) but if it looks better because of it it's worth the wait)

 

[GMpasqua]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brandon Conway /forum/thread/310207/is-the-greatest-story-ever-told-bluray-a-dissapointment/30#post_3796276





People in another thread have bought the most God-awful looking releases of One Eyed Jacks because they want to see the film, and I can't blame them. Of course they want better. We always want better. But the specific circumstances should be addressed rationally.



but the atmosphere of enthusiasts is always so cut off your nose to spite your face that it simply bothers me to not look at the situation from a reasonable middle ground. I'm a very rare half-full person in a half-empty atmosphere.



I guess if you'd rather not have these films released at all, MGM could stop releasing them whatsoever per your request. I'm just not that petty, especially since that is exactly the scenario we had just a year ago with MGM. I'd rather have the possibility of seeing a film, even in a presentation with certain short comings. And it always varies film to film per its specific circumstances.






It's not like "The Greatest Story Ever Told " has not been released - It's been released on DVD twice!

If you are going to release it on a superior format - make the effort or WHY BOTHER? People can still view GSET on DVD, and not on some MOD program, but don't slap it on a new format when the only reason to put it on the new format is to provide an execellent transfer.


MGM's disclaimer that this has been from the best suriving elements really is False advertising. What they really mean is this transfer is from our best surviving existing tranfer and we can't afford to make a new one

I purchase Bull Durham because I love the film, but the Blu-ray is not better than the DVD - Did I waste the money - IMO Yes.

Will I purchase other MGM titles - not as freely as before, unless they get raves from the critic, I will not waste the money for an upgrade to Bl-ray

 

[Brandon Conway]

*sigh*

Why does everyone insist my desire to discuss the context of the situation as an endorsement of the disc? I don't care if you buy 10 copies and use them as frisbees or if you buy none and send a scathing letter to MGM every day for a year. It's your money, do whatever you want with it. Everyone has their own standard.

Me as CEO of MGM? I'd make them do it right. I'd lose money in the short term, but I'd make them do it right. Make no mistake Greg - I'd try to keep you as a customer. Just because I can comprehend their current business model doesn't mean I would personally follow it. But right now MGM with this specific release is looking to cash in with those who don't have your high standard, and the Easter holiday will more than likely do exactly that for them. The non-discerning public far outnumbers the enthusiasts like yourself.

What I would do (invest millions and millions for probably a decade before seeing a profit, release very few high quality releases at much higher prices to offset the investments) makes little difference. I'm not able to do that. All I can do is buy or not buy. This specific release is costing me exactly $0. Others that come out will get what I feel they are worth to me.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by Brandon Conway
*sigh*

Why does everyone insist my desire to discuss the context of the situation as an endorsement of the disc?

Not everyone!




Crawdaddy

 

[GMpasqua]

Blu-ray Sales of "The Greatest Story Ever Told" is not going to make or break MGM.



This is a small selling release - not a blockbuster. Few people will buy it, so MGM is not really cashing in. It will probably cost MGM more to produce the disc than it will make in profits. So what is MGM gaining? Nothing, maybe they'll break even, but at what cost - the cost of their reputation.



Sales or no Sales, the Blu-ray of GSET at this point can only hurt MGM



As I said, I already canceled orders on MGM product. Is that what MGM really wants - very doubtful.



When I order a Sony product or Criterion I have faith the product will be good. MGM is too risky to order anything right now. Not only has GSET been poor reviewed so has "Overboard" "Bull Durham" "Rain Man" and "Moonstruck" and honestly I do not have high hopes for "Fiddler on the Roof" as the clips posted at Blu-ray.com have a decidedly brown image. I won't even consider "The Big Country" until I read the reviews.







I had so much faith in MGM/UA after their excellent release of "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang" last year (which I considered the best catalog title transfer release of 2010), but this year has been one disappointment after another leading to the conclusion of "MGM...Why bother"

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by Brandon Conway
*sigh*

Why does everyone insist my desire to discuss the context of the situation as an endorsement of the disc?

Yeah, it is possible to be against something but also understand how and look at why a mistake happened.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by Robert Crawford

Not everyone!

True.

 

[Lord Dalek]

Originally Posted by Bob Cashill
DVD Savant weighs in, negatively. "This is one of the few discs I've reviewed that looks like an almost complete mistake." http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s3496told.html

Wow Erickson actually REVIEWED something. I guess Jesus can cause miracles.

 

[GMpasqua]

Hmmm...? I guess if FOX releases the "Star Wars" sets in Sept with eleven year old transfers that's okay. I'm sure no one will complain even a tiny bit

 

[mercyflight]

The sad thing is that BluRay is pretty much the last format. This may be the version we'll be stuck with for quite a long time. Perhaps this was just a throw-away Easter title. A shame. This was one of the films from a very special time - the era of roadshow films. And perhaps it's not the "greatest' film, but I did see it in's roadshow run, and it was impressive, and it was presented in the time of showmanship. Is this going to help sell the Bluray format? or maybe they don't care anymore.

 

[TravisR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GMpasqua

Hmmm...? I guess if FOX releases the "Star Wars" sets in Sept with eleven year old transfers that's okay. I'm sure no one will complain even a tiny bit

People are going to complain about the Star Wars transfers if they're made the morning that the set comes out though.

Maybe I missed a post or two but I didn't see anyone say "It's good enough, just buy it". The people who are trying to give reasons for why this happened have repeatedly stated that they feel that people shouldn't buy it if they don't like it. It seems like everyone is on the same basic side here.

 

[GMpasqua]

There have been some posts to the effect: MGM is having trouble, give them a break



(forgive a shoddy transfer passed off to the consumer because the company has been really bad at managing their business)





FOX is just as much to blame. They would not distribute "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang" unless MGM did a new transfer. The result : A Stunningly remarkable transfer. Fox should have done the same for GSET or cancelled the disc altogether

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by GMpasqua

There have been some posts to the effect: MGM is having trouble, give them a break



(forgive a shoddy transfer passed off to the consumer because the company has been really bad at managing their business)





FOX is just as much to blame. They would not distribute "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang" unless MGM did a new transfer. The result : A Stunningly remarkable transfer. Fox should have done the same for GSET or cancelled the disc altogether

Which poster has stated to give them a break?

 

[Robert Crawford]

I watched King of Kings today and sampled The Greatest Story Ever Told. It was very obvious which of the two titles had the superior video presentation and it wasn't the latter. By the way, I found it amusing that prior to the beginning of The Greatest Story Ever Told, there is sort of a warning that this blu-ray presentation was derived from the best film elements currently available. Some people will ask, why bother releasing it all?

Next up, The Ten Commandments then I'll try to get to The Greatest Story Ever Told before Easter.






Crawdaddy

 

[OliverK]

Robert, you might want to review what you just wrote or one might get the impression that you are visually impaired

Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
I watched King of Kings today and sampled The Greatest Story Ever Told. It was very obvious which of the two titles had the superior video presentation and it was the latter.

 

[ShowsOn]

Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
I watched King of Kings today and sampled The Greatest Story Ever Told. It was very obvious which of the two titles had the superior video presentation and it was the latter.

Don't you mean the former - King of Kings?

 

[Robert Crawford]

Yeah, I corrected my post.